Re: US strike options on TSP

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21055
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby Philip » 28 Jun 2014 20:32

The world's most secret jail,Diego Garcia.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/j ... ego-garcia

UK urged to tell all on US rendition flights

Fresh claims over use of overseas territory of Diego Garcia as secret jail for terrorist suspects


Human rights groups seeking to confirm the use of a British overseas territory as a US secret prison have uncovered evidence previously undisclosed to the government confirming that more planes were involved in the extraordinary rendition of terrorist suspects around the world than had been admitted.

The revelation has raised fresh questions about the role played by Diego Garcia, an atoll in the Indian Ocean leased to the Americans and which campaigners allege has been used to hold suspects out of sight of lawyers and in contravention of basic human rights.

Based on assurances from the US, the British government has consistently denied the claims. However, experts believe ministers' denials do not square with the testimonies of several of those held by the US, including an opponent of Colonel Gaddafi, Abdul-hakim Belhadj, and his pregnant wife, Fatima Boudchar, who claim they were detained on Diego Garcia in March 2004.

In 2008 the then foreign secretary, David Miliband, conceded in parliament that two US planes with a single detainee on board had refuelled on Diego Garcia in 2002. But now it has emerged that Miliband's key testimony to parliament was based on an analysis of flights carried out by only 20% of the planes known to have been used in the extraordinary rendition programme.

The analysis was based on a list of 391 flights carried out by 40 planes that was produced by human rights groups, journalists and aviation experts. But only 10 of the planes on the list have been shown to have conducted renditions. The list did not include at least 20 planes that are believed to have been involved in the rendition process.

The true number emerged in documents filed in a lawsuit in New York in 2011 that showed how the US government contracted DynCorp Systems and Solutions LLC and Computer Sciences Corporation to operate a network of planes on its behalf.

The human rights group Reprieve says that, as a result of fresh analysis, it now has significant evidence that possibly as many as several dozen planes were involved in the process, raising the possibility that some visited Diego Garcia.

The revelation comes as the US Senate prepares to declassify a report that could confirm the use of Diego Garcia as a "black site". Earlier this month the Foreign Affairs Select Committee published a report that warned that the credibility of US assurances given to Britain about Diego Garcia had been "severely damaged". Proof that the atoll was used as a black site would be hugely damaging for British-American relations.


In March 2007, the then prime minister, Tony Blair, told the Intelligence and Security Committee that he was satisfied that the US had not rendered an individual through the UK or any of its Overseas Territories at any time since 11 September 2001.

More recently, the Foreign Office minister Hugh Robertson has said: "The British government is aware of no evidence that US detainees have been held on Diego Garcia since September 2001."

Last week Reprieve wrote to the foreign secretary, William Hague, asking him to confirm whether the government held monthly statistics of flights through Diego Garcia from January 2002 onwards as well as daily logs and general aviation reports.

It has asked Hague to confirm that all planes and flights recorded in the logs have been investigated, and discounted as being possible rendition flights. The move places a significant onus on the UK government to come clean on what it knew about the use of Diego Garcia by the US.

"We know the government holds crucial data on flights passing through Diego Garcia which it has so far refused to release," said Crofton Black, investigator for Reprieve. "Meanwhile, there are growing suspicions that the UK may be seeking to redact embarrassing information from the US Senate's report on renditions. Unless ministers come clean on these key issues, neither parliament nor the public will be able to have any confidence in the bland reassurances the government has provided concerning UK torture complicity."
Daily Email

kancha
BRFite
Posts: 935
Joined: 20 Apr 2005 19:13

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby kancha » 29 Jun 2014 11:12

Muppalla wrote:A tweet by ian bremmer ‏@ianbremmer · Jun 20 - US Foreign Policy, The Old Days




This fits in perfectly with the template

Image

kmkraoind
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3908
Joined: 27 Jun 2008 00:24

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby kmkraoind » 30 Jun 2014 14:50

Before Shooting in Iraq, a Warning on Blackwater

WASHINGTON — Just weeks before Blackwater guards fatally shot 17 civilians at Baghdad’s Nisour Square in 2007, the State Department began investigating the security contractor’s operations in Iraq. But the inquiry was abandoned after Blackwater’s top manager there issued a threat: “that he could kill” the government’s chief investigator and “no one could or would do anything about it as we were in Iraq,” according to department reports.
...............
Today, as conflict rages again in Iraq, four Blackwater guards involved in the Nisour Square shooting are on trial in Washington on charges stemming from the episode, the government’s second attempt to prosecute the case in an American court after previous charges against five guards were dismissed in 2009.


As long as spilled blood is not of White Christians, no body cares about rule of law in US.

Rony
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3281
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby Rony » 01 Jul 2014 02:56

US Supreme Court ruling : Religious rights trump birth control rule

A sharply divided Supreme Court ruled Monday that some companies with religious objections can avoid the contraceptives requirement in President Barack Obama's health care overhaul, the first time the high court has declared that businesses can hold religious views under federal law.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby ramana » 01 Jul 2014 04:15

What is company with religious objections?
How does a corporation have individual rights?

Looks like ulema are giving justice.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11639
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby A_Gupta » 03 Jul 2014 06:48

http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semp ... olicy.html

"Choosing enemies, propaganda, regime change and plain dumb policy - by Confusedponderer"

An excerpt to whet your appetite:

When one listens to US policy pronouncements there appears to be little concern for why foreign leaders act as they do. Their and their countries interests don’t matter. They are more like a stage for the US to act out their global reach and play to their domestic audiences.

Just take for instance Syria and their alliance Hezbollah and Iran. Why is Syria allied with Iran? How important is this alliance for Syria? Never mind, the US want to roll back Iran, and Hezbollah (for the Israelis and the Saudis, one of the more peculiar alliances of our days), and Syria is with Iran, so Syria either falls in line or into chaos.

What does the US offer as an alternative to Syria’s alliance with Iran and Hezbollah? Well, unconditional surrender of course. Compromise is not on the table. And in face of such a generous offer Assad won’t accept US terms? Just because doing so would probably mean death for him, his wife, kids, their extended family and persecution of religious minorities, including Christians, in Syria by Jihadi fanatics? What’s not to like!

If one accepts the wisdom of John Kerry and the US media, the reasons why some foreign leaders just won’t fall in line remain mysterious, and are usually attributed to personal flaws rather than matters of policy – which in turn leads to ridiculous theses like: Putin wants to recreate the USSR, and he’s a thug – he was in the KGB! – that’s why he is being so nasty. It’s nothing that the US does and could stop doing. NATO’s creeping expansion towards Russia’s borders is just an accident.

Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10691
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby Vayutuvan » 03 Jul 2014 10:16

SCOTUS is dominated by conservative judges and hence several judgements siding with conservatives AKA Christian Right.

prahaar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2797
Joined: 15 Oct 2005 04:14

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby prahaar » 03 Jul 2014 14:23

matrimc wrote:SCOTUS is dominated by conservative judges and hence several judgements siding with conservatives AKA Christian Right.


Does the ruling mean that an employer can refuse/opt-out to provide certain insurance coverage (ex. birth control) to his/her employees, if it does not match their religious convictions? It is tantamount to a Hindu employee not getting approval for a pork lunch expense claim from his Muslim employer (If the Muslim employer feels that pork does not match his religious convictions).

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11639
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby A_Gupta » 04 Jul 2014 08:05

The creeping risk of theocratic violence:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/07/0 ... c-Violence

panduranghari
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3778
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby panduranghari » 04 Jul 2014 20:28

The massive Myth of Hillary Rodham Clinton

Hillary’s smiling face has looked up from the desk for two weeks.

We wanted to read her book, if only to mock and jeer, but we couldn’t bring ourselves to open it. It was too big. Too earnest. Too carefully put together. There would be no surprises.

Like Hillary’s photo on the cover, every detail had been checked by pollsters and approved image consultants. No facts that didn’t support the uplift of the narrative were allowed. No ideas that don’t appeal to the majority voter were permitted.

Hillary is made appear tough, but fair… well-informed… hard working… with a razor-sharp intellect and a heart like road kill on a hot, sunny day: warm, soft and overpowering.

Hard Choices

Finally, we had to do our duty, on your behalf, dear reader. We opened the book so you don’t have to. The book, called Hard Choices, is hard to pick up. And easy to put down.

Not because you will disagree with its ideas; there are no ideas to disagree with. Instead, the book is full of self-serving and empty blah blah. It wallows in the glory of the US Empire… and of course, the incredible, gracious tenacity of Hillary Rodham Clinton.

All you have to do is to look at the photos. There you find Hillary shaking hands with every corrupt, incompetent leader the world has to offer… as well as demonstrating all the qualities the dim voter may look for.

In one she is compassionate towards children. In another she is an activist for women. She is a fun-loving secretary of State, too. There’s a photo of her at the piano with Bono. Another of her dancing at a party in Cartagena, Colombia. And there’s Joe Biden whispering in the ear of a giggling Hillary.

What a gal!

The premise of the book is that leaders have to make tough decisions. Her first was her decision to leave a promising career as a Washington lawyer to go to Little Rock and help Bill with his political career.

On the evidence, this paid off. Bill hit it big in politics. Hillary became his partner – like Evita to Juan Perón. Or Christina to Néstor Kirchner. Now, Hillary is in line to be the first woman president.

From First Lady to First Woman President

This seems not only alarming, but also likely…

The Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday that she and Bill had raised more than $1 billion from corporate donors during their two decades on the national stage. Zombie industries and crony capitalists know Hillary can be bought… and at a reasonable price.

The voters will fall in line. They don’t have a hard choice or an easy choice. Most likely, they will have no choice at all. The Republicans will probably field a candidate with essentially the same policies.

The next hard choice Hillary faced was whether or not to accept President Obama’s offer to head up the State Department. She always says and does the right thing. So she took the job because “when your president asks you to serve you should say yes.”

So far, we are only in the opening pages of the book, and already Hillary is nauseating.

She says she’s been doing “public service” for her entire adult life. But what possible service is it? In every post she has held, she was more served than serving.

When she was first lady, for example, who put the bread on the table? Who baked it? Who washed the dishes? Not Hillary!

As secretary of State she says she spent 2,000 hours and flew a million miles. Airborne, at taxpayer expense, she and her friends would “enjoy a glass of wine.” And “watch movies.”

How did the public get anything out of it?

The Dervish Diplomat

“I didn’t enjoy playing the bad cop,” she says of a conversation with the Israeli prime minister, “but it was part of the job.”

Speaking for ourselves, we didn’t ask her to say anything at all… and we’ll make our own choices, thank you very much.

One of the hardest choices she had to make was whether or not to send Navy SEALs “to bring Osama bin Laden to justice.” In the event, they didn’t even try. They assassinated him on the spot.

But around and around the world she went, a dervish diplomat. Asia, the Middle East, the Far East, the Arab Spring, the Russian winter, the European fall. Blah after blah… well-meaning public servant after well-meaning public servant… human rights, women’s rights, children’s rights. Six hundred pages.

How does she remember so many details? Why does she bother, except to glorify her own mastery of pointless detail?

She says something to somebody who says something else… bumbling from one scene of mischief to another of mayhem. Involving the free and independent citizens of the United States of America in dozens of conflicts in which they have no interest of any kind.

Hillary has been on the government payroll since she was 13 years old, she tells us, when she had a summer job “supervising a small park.”

We don’t know how much supervising a 13 year old can do. But heck, Hillary can do anything. On one page she’s rescuing children from a brothel. On another, she’s cleaning the air. On another, she’s preventing a war.

We are suspicious of people who stay up too late. Stalin worked until 5 a.m. Hitler was a night owl, too. Staying up late is linked to addictions – alcohol, ***** or video games.

But over and over, Hillary tells us that she was up until the “wee hours” talking to someone. Good God, what awful calamity would have happened if she had just gone to bed and turned off her cellphone?

And now, the poor woman must be tired. So many hard choices! So much public service!

She needs a rest. Retire her.

Regards,
Bill

Amitava
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 87
Joined: 03 Sep 2000 11:31
Location: New Jersey, USA.

Update on the Sarasota Saudis

Postby Amitava » 05 Jul 2014 02:09

Remember the case of the Saudi family that suddenly left their Florida home two weeks before 9/11?

Here's a recent update (emphasis added)

Down the rabbit hole with the FBI: Saying 9/11 documents don’t exist when they do
JUNE 25, 2014 AT 6:22 A
By Dan Christensen and Anthony Summers, BrowardBulldog.org

In its only public statements about the Sarasota Saudis who suspiciously quit their home in a gated community in haste two weeks before 9/11 – leaving behind numerous personal belongings — the FBI has said it investigated, but found no connection to the 9/11 plot.

Nearly three years later, however, the FBI has yet to back up its assertions by producing investigative reports written by agents who conducted the probe.

In fact, the few FBI records that have been released in response to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed in 2012 by BrowardBulldog.org flatly contradict the Bureau’s public statements. They say the Sarasota Saudis had “many connections” to 9/11 terrorist figures – a determination in line with the recollections of a counterterrorism officer with knowledge of the investigation.

The officer, who has asked not to be named, said authorities found gatehouse vehicle and telephone records indicating that Mohamed Atta and other terrorist figures visited the luxury home of Abdulaziz and Anoud al-Hijji.

KEY RECORDS HAVEN’T SURFACED

The gatehouse and phone records haven’t surfaced – despite the completion this month of a court-ordered search of more than 80,000 pages of FBI 9/11 records. Neither have specific FBI documents mentioned in the handful of FBI records that have trickled out to date, or others that former Florida Sen. Bob Graham, co-chair of Congress’s Joint Inquiry into the 9/11 attacks, says he was shown by the FBI after the story broke in 2011.

What’s going on?

The answer appears to lie in an obscure provision of federal law enacted decades ago that allows the FBI to say that certain sensitive records don’t exist when they actually do exist.

“That sounds like the most likely thing because you know beyond any question that records were created and they’re not showing up where they should show up,” said Washington, D.C. attorney James Lesar, a veteran FOIA litigator. “They’ve simply kept them secret.”

President Lyndon Johnson signed the Freedom of Information Act into law in 1966. It provides access to federal agency records, but there are nine exemptions, including personal privacy, which agencies can invoke to withhold records from public inspection. There are also three less common “exclusions” used to suppress information about sensitive law enforcement and national security matters.

A 1986 amendment to the act incorporated an exclusion that allows the FBI to treat classified records about foreign intelligence or counterintelligence, or international terrorism as “not subject to the requirements” of the act.

Justice Department guidelines established by Reagan-era Attorney General Edwin Meese say that means that those who request excluded records can be told, “there exist no records responsive to your FOIA request.”

NO LYING?

“The approach has never involved ‘lying,’ as some have suggested,” Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich told Sen. Charles Grassley, the ranking Iowa Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee in a Nov. 2011 letter. “The logic is simple: When a citizen makes a request pursuant to the FOIA, either implicit or explicit in the request is that it seeks records that are subject to the FOIA; where…records that exist are not subject to the FOIA, the statement “there exist no records responsive to your FOIA request” is wholly accurate.”

Still, such answers can “mislead,” as California U.S. District Court Judge Cormac J. Carney observed in a 2011 ruling in another FOIA case.

When the law is invoked “the government will routinely submit an in camera declaration addressing that claim, one way or the other,” the guidelines say. “In camera” is legal terminology for privately in the judge’s chambers.

That appears to be what happened in federal court in Fort Lauderdale this month when the FBI filed Records Section Chief David Hardy’s fourth declaration in BrowardBulldog.org’s FOIA case. A footnote in the declaration says the FBI simultaneously filed Hardy’s fifth declaration in camera and ex parte (without providing a copy to the news organization).

Miami attorney Thomas Julin represents BrowardBulldog.org.

“We intend to challenge the FBI’s claim that it has no records or that they can be treated as not subject to the Freedom of Information Act,” said Julin. “The judge can make a determination that these records should be open to the American public and I would expect him to do that if he finds that disclosure of these records would not endanger national security.

“We have every reason to believe that this is the case since Sen. Graham has been espousing the view that the existence of a Saudi network in the United States is something that should be disclosed to the American people and would not endanger the United States,” Julin said. Former Sen. Bob Graham, D-Fl., chaired Congress’s Joint Inquiry into 9/11.

Meanwhile, U.S. District Judge William J. Zloch continues his review of Hardy’s latest declarations and more than 80,000 pages of un-redacted 9/11 documents the FBI has produced for his private inspection.

QUESTIONS ABOUT AN FBI AGENT’S TRANSFER

FBI records released to date and the observations of the counterterrorism officer appear to fit the FOIA exemption scenario.

The FBI agent in charge of the Sarasota Saudi investigation was Gregory Sheffield. According to the counterterrorism officer, Sheffield wrote two released 2002 reports, including one citing connections between al-Hijji and others tied to the attacks.

On July 22, 2002, Sheffield interviewed al-Hijji’s wife, Anoud, and mother-in-law Deborah Ghazzawi “regarding possible terrorist activity.” The women, who had returned briefly to the home, denied fleeing before 9/11 or knowing certain unnamed individuals, according to the reports.

Soon after, according to the counterterrorism officer, Sheffield was transferred to the FBI’s foreign counterintelligence (FCI) division and left the area. The officer said the transfer suggested Sheffield may have recruited an al-Hijji family member as a source of information.

“I believe that the transfer of Sheffield to the FCI side of the Bureau speaks volumes as to the lack of information available. If he was able to recruit a family member then all information up to that point will be off limits under the National Security Act,” the counterintelligence officer said in an interview last year.


http://www.browardbulldog.org/2014/06/down-the-rabbit-hole-with-the-fbi-saying-911-documents-dont-exist-when-they-do/

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby svinayak » 07 Jul 2014 22:01

Chalmers Johnson, Portrait of a Sagging Empire

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175864/ ... _empire__/

Sagging Empire

In other words, the main fears you might hear in Washington -- if anyone even bothered to wonder what would happen, should we begin to dismantle our empire -- would prove but chimeras. They would, in fact, be remarkably similar to Washington's dire predictions in the 1970s about states all over Asia, then Africa, and beyond falling, like so many dominoes, to communist domination if we did not win the war in Vietnam.

What, then, would the world be like if the U.S. lost control globally -- Washington's greatest fear and deepest reflection of its own overblown sense of self-worth -- as is in fact happening now despite our best efforts? What would that world be like if the U.S. just gave it all up? What would happen to us if we were no longer the "sole superpower" or the world's self-appointed policeman?

Shreeman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3762
Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
Contact:

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby Shreeman » 08 Jul 2014 04:11


ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby ramana » 09 Jul 2014 03:47

svinayak wrote:Chalmers Johnson, Portrait of a Sagging Empire

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175864/ ... _empire__/

Sagging Empire

In other words, the main fears you might hear in Washington -- if anyone even bothered to wonder what would happen, should we begin to dismantle our empire -- would prove but chimeras. They would, in fact, be remarkably similar to Washington's dire predictions in the 1970s about states all over Asia, then Africa, and beyond falling, like so many dominoes, to communist domination if we did not win the war in Vietnam.

What, then, would the world be like if the U.S. lost control globally -- Washington's greatest fear and deepest reflection of its own overblown sense of self-worth -- as is in fact happening now despite our best efforts? What would that world be like if the U.S. just gave it all up? What would happen to us if we were no longer the "sole superpower" or the world's self-appointed policeman?


There is historical precedent in Europe when Rome gave up its far frontiers and withdrew its legions. This plunged Europe into Dark ages but from the darkness emerged the Renaissance and the Modern world.
So US that thinks its the Roman successor universal empire might also decide like Rome did its not worth it.

Even GB, France and other colonials did that post WWII and let the two main winners of FSU and US battle it out while they promoted Scotch!


China and to a lesser extent India will step into the breach and there will be a new battle of ideas totalitarian business vs distributed business networks.
.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11639
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby A_Gupta » 09 Jul 2014 16:23

$1.1 million settlement for body search of New Mexico woman falsely suspected of carrying drugs:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/07/0 ... ity-search

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby ramana » 09 Jul 2014 19:53

A_Gupta wrote:$1.1 million settlement for body search of New Mexico woman falsely suspected of carrying drugs:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/07/0 ... ity-search



Had she been wearing a cellphone underwear the SC would have upheld her rights to unlawful search!!!

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby ramana » 13 Jul 2014 01:46

America: Imagine a World Without Her (Audiobook) by Dinesh D'Souza and Walter Dixon
English | 2014 | ISBN: 1480584932 |

Is America a source of pride, as Americans have long held, or shame, as Progressives allege? Beneath an innocent exterior, are our lives complicit in a national project of theft, expropriation, oppression, and murder? Or is America still the hope of the world?

New York Times best-selling author Dinesh D'Souza says these questions are no mere academic exercise. It is the Progressive view that is taught in our schools, that is preached by Hollywood, and that shapes the policies of the Obama administration. If America is a force for inequality and injustice in the world, its power deserves to be diminished; if traditional America is based on oppression and theft, then traditional America must be reformed - and the federal government can do the reforming.

In America: Imagine a World Without Her D'Souza offers a passionate and sharply reasoned defense of America, knocking down every important accusation made by Progressives against our country.


Provocative in its analysis, stunning in its conclusions, Dinesh D'Souza's America will be the most talked about audiobook of the year.



Note its D'Souza who is providing a stirring defence of idea of America!!!!
Not TSJ and his ilk.

BTW I happen to know him when he was still a college kid at Dartmouth.

TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby TSJones » 13 Jul 2014 02:11

ramana wrote:
America: Imagine a World Without Her (Audiobook) by Dinesh D'Souza and Walter Dixon
English | 2014 | ISBN: 1480584932 |

Is America a source of pride, as Americans have long held, or shame, as Progressives allege? Beneath an innocent exterior, are our lives complicit in a national project of theft, expropriation, oppression, and murder? Or is America still the hope of the world?

New York Times best-selling author Dinesh D'Souza says these questions are no mere academic exercise. It is the Progressive view that is taught in our schools, that is preached by Hollywood, and that shapes the policies of the Obama administration. If America is a force for inequality and injustice in the world, its power deserves to be diminished; if traditional America is based on oppression and theft, then traditional America must be reformed - and the federal government can do the reforming.

In America: Imagine a World Without Her D'Souza offers a passionate and sharply reasoned defense of America, knocking down every important accusation made by Progressives against our country.


Provocative in its analysis, stunning in its conclusions, Dinesh D'Souza's America will be the most talked about audiobook of the year.



Note its D'Souza who is providing a stirring defence of idea of America!!!!
Not TSJ and his ilk.

BTW I happen to know him when he was still a college kid at Dartmouth.


I gave four years of my life for my country. And treated worse than any convict in a federal or state prison. That includes going w/o meals, sleeping on bare dirt, and being slapped and punched while standing at attention. Some of us gave way more than that, their life and limbs. How many of you can say the same? As far as I am concerned Mr D'Souza exploits cheap patriotism.

Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3609
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31
Contact:

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby Paul » 13 Jul 2014 02:19

In the movie made on Obama D'Souza goes to Kenya and said in the movie that he and his team had to leave Kenya to due to local hostility.

I am concerned that Indians will get caught in the inevitable cross fire that he will attract mostly from the African americans.

One of the main themes of his movie is that he was linking Obama's father's anti colonial thoughts ("Dreams FROM my father") derived from his kenyan colonial days, then he goes on to link this legacy to what he anti British colonial movement in India....where was the need for him to bring India into the picture??? Would it not further exacerbate the anti India prejudices of the republican votebank.

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby UlanBatori » 17 Jul 2014 04:40

One small act of large courage

It's 12 years-plus since these people have been put there without trial. It violates the Constitution of the USA. Apparently there ARE still people who care.

member_22733
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3788
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby member_22733 » 18 Jul 2014 01:28

The Justice Gap

Taibbi wrote “The Divide” to demonstrate that unequal wealth is producing grotesquely unequal outcomes in criminal justice. You might say that’s an old story, but Taibbi believes that, just as income disparities are growing ever wider, so, too, are disparities in who attracts the attention of cops and prosecutors and who doesn’t. Violent crime has fallen by 44 percent in America over the past two decades, but during that same period the prison population has more than doubled, skewing heavily black and poor. In essence, poverty itself is being criminalized. Meanwhile, at the other end of the income distribution, an epidemic of white-collar crime has overtaken the financial sector, indicated, for instance, by a proliferation of record-breaking civil settlements. But partly because of an embarrassing succession of botched Justice Department prosecutions, and partly because of a growing worry (first enunciated by Attorney General Eric Holder when he was Bill Clinton’s deputy attorney general) that any aggressive prosecution of big banks could destabilize the economy, Wall Street has come, under President Obama, to enjoy near-total immunity from criminal prosecution. It had more to fear, ironically, when George W. Bush was president.


The long term (by the time Gen Y and millenials retire) is looking very bleak for the US, unless there are some deep structural changes.

Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10691
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby Vayutuvan » 18 Jul 2014 06:22

ramana garu: Though I am not very enthusiastic about Obama, I am not sure whether I like D'souza any better. Didn't he write an article many moons ago asking for US intervention in India and was roundly criticized at BRF? His views below (quoting from Wikipedia) are in tune with "British civilized barbaric eating their food with their right hand Hindu heathen of India" Oxbridge brown sahib elites.

Colonialism[edit]
In the second chapter of What's So Great About America, D'Souza defends colonialism, arguing that the problem with Africa is not that it was colonized, but rather that it was not colonized long enough. He supports the European colonization of India and other countries, claiming that Christian colonization was a good thing for India because it was a way for Indians to escape the caste system, superstitions and poverty.[43][44]


Addded later: I cannot agree with his views on various issues as the following shows (again from Wikipedia)

Media appearances[edit]
As a public intellectual, D'Souza has appeared on numerous national television networks and programs.[47] On November 30, 2007, he debated Tufts University professor Daniel Dennett at Tufts on whether or not God was a man-made invention.[48]
Shortly after the September 11, 2001 attacks, D'Souza appeared on Politically Incorrect hosted by Bill Maher. He disputed the assertion that terrorists were cowards by saying, "Look at what they did. You have a whole bunch of guys who were willing to give their life; none of them backed out. All of them slammed themselves into pieces of concrete. These are warriors." Maher agreed with D'Souza's comments and said, "We have been the cowards. Lobbing cruise missiles from two thousand miles away". Maher's comments ultimately led to advertisers ending their support and his show being cancelled.[49]
During an interview on The Colbert Report on January 16, 2007, while promoting his book, The Enemy At Home: The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11, D'Souza maintained that liberals had some responsibility for the September 11, 2001 attacks. He says liberals' "penchant for interference" had a decided effect in convincing the Carter administration to withdraw support from the Shah, which brought on Muslim fundamentalists control of the Iranian government. He also said that the distorted representation of American culture on television is one source of resentment of the United States by Muslims worldwide. D'Souza believes that traditional Muslims are not too different from traditional Jews and Christians in America. Towards the end of the interview, he admitted that he and Islamic militants share some of the same negative beliefs about liberal Americans.[50]
D'Souza has debated several atheists and critics of Christianity at programs at various universities, including Peter Singer,[51] Bart Ehrman,[52] Christopher Hitchens,[53] and David Silverman,[54] on religious and moral issues, including whether there can be morality without God, how a benevolent God can allow suffering, the concept of religion in general, and whether Christianity is good for America, among others.

anmol
BRFite
Posts: 1869
Joined: 05 May 2009 17:39

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby anmol » 18 Jul 2014 06:36

www.pewforum.org/2014/07/16/how-americans-feel-about-religious-groups/

How Americans Feel About Religious Groups
pewforum.org | Jul 16th 2014


From the article:
Image
Image
ImageImage

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21177
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby Prem » 19 Jul 2014 02:54

Unenforceable ban on atheists holding public office still on the books in 8 states

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/07 ... ic-office/

The U.S. Constitution says religious tests cannot be required to hold public office. But if you read through the constitutions of eight states, they seem to require just that. It’s strange but true. Provisions barring atheists from holding public office are written into the constitutions of those states, even though they can't be enforced.
That's because the Supreme Court ruled in 1961 that a Maryland man who was appointed as a notary public did not have to declare his belief in God be eligible for the office, which was required under the state’s constitution. The justices ruled unanimously that forcing the man to do so would violate his rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments.The case, Torcaso v. Watkins, made enforcement of the provisions illegal, but merely allowing them to remain on the books does not violate the U.S. Constitution. So they remain in Arkansas, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas.
Mississippi’s Constitution states, “No person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office in this state.” Arkansas' Constitution goes even further; it bars atheists from testifying in court.Tennessee's bars atheists from office, but, curiously, the state also forbids ministers. Its provision states that any minister of the gospel or priest of any denomination is barred from public office because they “ought not to be diverted from the great duties of their functions.”
Dave Muscato, a spokesman for American Atheists, said it is “fair and right” that the Supreme Court declared the provisions illegal, calling them “blatantly discriminatory, immoral, and un-American.”He said having the provisions on the books is a “stark reminder” of the discrimination atheists have faced in America.“While the social stigma still exists and black-and-white laws on the books do lend informal credibility to the stigma, insofar as it's our place to as (nonprofit) to speak on the issue, we encourage our lawmakers to spend as much time as possible making sure that religion and government stay separate in their work now, and that atheists are not discriminated against in the present,” he told FoxNews.com in an email.
The provisions still cause controversy. North Carolina’s caused a stir in 2009 when Cecil Bothwell, an atheist, was elected to the city council in the city of Asheville.
Bothwell’s critics said he should be barred from office because of the state Constitution's guidelines, but ultimately he was sworn in. One of those critics, Southern heritage activist H.K. Edgerton, told FoxNews.com the provision barring atheists should be enforced because it “is in the North Carolina State Constitution, and is law.”“Muscato said it is unlikely lawmakers will ever seek to get the provisions taken out of the state constitutions, as there is rarely a push to remove unenforceable laws from the books.“However, having them on the books, even though they aren't enforceable, is a stark reminder that our country once considered an atheist so unfit for office that it was proper to bar a person from serving the people just because the candidate wasn't indoctrinated into believing,” he said.Atheist lawmakers are rare in the U.S. A Pew Research poll found only one current member of Congress, Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., said she was "unaffiliated" with a religion. Ten other lawmakers refused to answer the question or said they did not know.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby svinayak » 19 Jul 2014 10:03

matrimc wrote:ramana garu: Though I am not very enthusiastic about Obama, I am not sure whether I like D'souza any better. Didn't he write an article many moons ago asking for US intervention in India and was roundly criticized at BRF? His views below (quoting from Wikipedia) are in tune with "British civilized barbaric eating their food with their right hand Hindu heathen of India" Oxbridge brown sahib elites.

Colonialism[edit]
In the second chapter of What's So Great About America, D'Souza defends colonialism, arguing that the problem with Africa is not that it was colonized, but rather that it was not colonized long enough. He supports the European colonization of India and other countries, claiming that Christian colonization was a good thing for India because it was a way for Indians to escape the caste system, superstitions and poverty.



What is the reason he has this personal opinion.
Some of the justification of being converted to a foreign religion in his ancestors land is to show negative images of his ancestors. This is no different from a high school teenager.

Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby Agnimitra » 20 Jul 2014 09:55

It is not uncommon to come across meetings in US MNCs like Microsoft where meeting leaders break out speaking Chinese, even though non-Chinese people are present. I have even seen white American executives deliver parts of their speeches in flawless Mandarin in US company meetings with offshore partners, on US soil. Its all considered part of relationship building and working with partners whose language is different from yours. But why is it that, when it comes to India, anything except English is not tolerated, and Americans feel that they can get away with bullying Indians on points of language, while they sometimes go out of their way to accommodate Japanese or Chinese language preferences?

Infosys sued by former US employees over Hindi bias
The case has been filed by Layla Bolten, Gregor Handloser and two more employees. Bolten was hired as a tester, while Handloser was hired by Infosys in 2004 as a sales manager.

According to the lawsuit filed in the US District Court of Eastern District of Wisconsin, the former employees alleged that they were "excluded" from work conversations by their supervisors and co-workers who "regularly spoke in Hindi" in front of them.

Bolten also alleged that a vast majority of test lead positions for the project were filled with South Asian workers (mostly Indians), who had less experience with software testing than her.

Besides, Bolten and Handloser, the other two plaintiffs are Brenda Koehler and Kelly Parker. The case has been filed against Infosys Technologies and Infosys Public Services. All the plaintiffs are US citizens.

A big part of the reason is that Indians themselves bend over backwards to be English-compliant at the cost of their own languages. In such a situation, Americans would naturally expect Indians to defer to English at all times, with no cultural exceptions needed.

How often does this happen with MNCs from Japan, china, south Korea, etc?

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21177
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby Prem » 22 Jul 2014 22:42

Split Down the Middle,Only Black or White, No Different Sahdes for him

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RoBGhC7X ... bedded#t=0
Anti-Immigration Activist: Public Execution Would Be ‘Too Good’ for Obama
Calling House Speaker John Boehner’s definitely worthwhile and completely rational plan to sue the president a political loser, Steinlight then segued into a sidebar on how unchecked Obama’s power has become, as Imagine2050 reported. “There’s no court that’s going to stop Obama from doing anything,” he said.So what are the options for conservatives of good faith for dealing with such an out of control executive? Steinlight has an idea:
“We all know, if there ever was a president that deserved to be impeached, it’s this guy. Alright? And I wouldn’t stop. I would think being hung, drawn, and quartered is probably too good for him.”
When he’s not advocating for the Medieval torture and murder of the president, Steinlight is no stranger to other imaginative musings. Steinlight has spoken about taking a baseball bat to religious leaders who support amnesty for immigrants, and said it’s likely the U.S. government will go into Texas and disarm citizens if they try to do anything about people crossing the border. He’s also speculated about what America would look like if immigration continued unabated. “In sum, we’ll witness the unmaking of America,” he said. Not only will that mean a change in our cultural demographic, it would literally throw the balance of political power off its axis, creating a permanent majority for the left which will last for a thousand years I don’t know what on earth we can do about Muslim immigration, I really don’t,” he said. “I mean, if I had my druthers, we would bring back something like the McCarran act in the ’50s, which barred communists and fascists on the grounds that they believe in things that are subversive to the Constitution. Well, Muslims believe in things that are subversive to the Constitution.”
Anyway, that’s the guy from the non-partisan immigration think tank who is one of the most insightful minds on immigration.

schinnas
BRFite
Posts: 1761
Joined: 11 Jun 2009 09:44

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby schinnas » 22 Jul 2014 23:03

Jhujar wrote:
. “I mean, if I had my druthers, we would bring back something like the McCarran act in the ’50s, which barred communists and fascists on the grounds that they believe in things that are subversive to the Constitution. Well, Muslims believe in things that are subversive to the Constitution.”

Anyway, that’s the guy from the non-partisan immigration think tank who is one of the most insightful minds on immigration.


This guy might be a nutjob but countries that cherish their way of life cannot turn a blind eye to muslim immigration / population growth given the fast rising fanaticism amongst muslims and their tendency to disregard law of the land in favor of sharia and losing all concepts of identity in favor of islamic identity.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11639
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby A_Gupta » 23 Jul 2014 16:19

US Attorney Preet Bharara in the news. The story sheds light on corruption in US state-level politics.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/07/2 ... ical-Plans

Rony
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3281
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby Rony » 24 Jul 2014 04:18

old video but on dot

'The new racism is denying racism'


Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby Cosmo_R » 24 Jul 2014 04:33

TSJones wrote:
I gave four years of my life for my country. And treated worse than any convict in a federal or state prison. That includes going w/o meals, sleeping on bare dirt, and being slapped and punched while standing at attention. Some of us gave way more than that, their life and limbs. How many of you can say the same? As far as I am concerned Mr D'Souza exploits cheap patriotism.


DD is an exemplar of cheap/zero cost patriotism along with many/all of the Fox News types. In fact, I suspect all of Congress with very few exceptions.

They'll get you to die for the country before they even think of getting the other SOBs to die for their country fighting you.

George C Scott where are you when we need you?

I also remember Luci Baines Johnson pulling out draft numbers out of a bowl on the WH lawn as if it was Lotto.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21177
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby Prem » 24 Jul 2014 06:18

http://blackbag.gawker.com/uh-did-we-fi ... ceydonohue
Did We Finish Looking Into Those 1,700 Pentagon Child ***** Cases?
( Pencil Pushers or Deliberate deed)

Way back in January 2011, the Boston Globe discovered that Defense Department investigators had failed to finish reviewing 1,700 cases of Pentagon employees (and contractors) purchasing and downloading child *****—finishing off a review of 5,200 cases that had been submitted to them by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE), which has the unenviable task of pursuing that sort of thing. Within the week, contrite members of the Department of Defense Inspector General's office had contacted the Globe vowing to correct this ghastly oversight:Gordon S. Heddell, the Department of Defense's inspector general, said in a statement to the Globe that his office is working aggressively to correct the mishandling of cases identified in a multidepartment government probe called Operation Flicker."I can assure those with questions that my office is conducting an aggressive pursuit of anyone implicated in Operation Flicker and that it is a key investigative priority,'' Heddell said in his first public statement on the matter.Three and half years later, perhaps it's worth asking how that went. Gordon S. Heddell stepped down from his post in December 2011 a few days before Christmas, but a few Pentagon cases from Operation Flicker's investigation have been successfully prosecuted. Working with ICE, the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS! Like the show!) managed to convict a 40-year old man, Carlton Williams, for possessing "over 6,000 images and 100 videos depicting children engaged in sexually explicit conduct, including prepubescent children under the age of 12." A contractor working at the U.S. Naval Support Activity Center in Panama City Beach, Florida was also arrested and, according to legal records accessed via PACER, has plead guilty and will serve a sentence of nine years and one month:America's passionate community of paranoid dot-connectors are very busy tying this scandal to the UK's elite pedophile scandal, blackmail allegations, dissident entrapment schemes, and vast ritualistic child sex abuse cults. Jittery, economically depressed, and emotionally numb, the public is dying to know: What about the remaining 1,698 accused military employees and contractors?"Sorry, but we cannot release information about these cases at this time," Brenda Rolin of the Department of Defense Inspector General's Public Affairs Office told Black Bag via email. "We recommend you request information on the closed cases through the Freedom of Information Act process.".

[

panduranghari
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3778
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby panduranghari » 24 Jul 2014 13:53

ramana wrote:What is company with religious objections?
How does a corporation have individual rights?

Looks like ulema are giving justice.


City of London.

Rony
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3281
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby Rony » 25 Jul 2014 23:36

How Americans Feel About Religious Groups

Jews, Catholics and evangelical Christians are viewed warmly by the American public. When asked to rate each group on a “feeling thermometer” ranging from 0 to 100 – where 0 reflects the coldest, most negative possible rating and 100 the warmest, most positive rating – all three groups receive an average rating of 60 or higher (63 for Jews, 62 for Catholics and 61 for evangelical Christians). And 44% of the public rates all three groups in the warmest part of the scale (67 or higher).

Buddhists, Hindus and Mormons receive neutral ratings on average, ranging from 48 for Mormons to 53 for Buddhists. The public views atheists and Muslims more coldly; atheists receive an average rating of 41, and Muslims an average rating of 40. Fully 41% of the public rates Muslims in the coldest part of the thermometer (33 or below), and 40% rate atheists in the coldest part.

These are some of the key findings from a Pew Research Center survey conducted May 30-June 30, 2014, among 3,217 adults who are part of Pew Research’s new American Trends Panel, a nationally representative panel of randomly selected U.S. adults.1

Groups Tend To Be Rated Most Positively by Their Own Members

Religious groups are rated more positively by their own members than by people from other religious backgrounds. Catholics as a group, for example, receive an average thermometer rating of 80 from Americans who describe themselves as Catholic, compared with 58 from non-Catholics. Similarly, evangelical Christians receive an average rating of 79 from people who describe themselves as born-again or evangelical Christians, compared with an average rating of 52 from non-evangelicals. Among non-evangelicals, roughly as many people give evangelicals a cold rating (27%) as give them a warm rating (30%).

The fact that Catholics and evangelical Christians are large groups and view their fellow adherents warmly helps explain why the two groups are among the most favorably viewed groups in the population. (Catholics account for 20% of the sample in the survey, and self-described evangelical/born-again Christians account for 32% of the sample.) The other groups included in the survey constitute much smaller shares of the overall population. As a result, their ratings are very similar whether they are based on the entire population or only on people who do not belong to the group.

Both Jews and Atheists Rate Evangelicals Negatively, but Evangelicals Rate Jews Highly

Attitudes among religious groups toward each other range from mutual regard to unrequited positive feelings to mutual coldness. Catholics and evangelicals, the two largest Christian groups measured here, generally view each other warmly. White evangelical Protestants give Catholics an average thermometer rating of 63; Catholics rate evangelicals at 57. Evangelicals also hold very positive views of Jews, with white evangelical Protestants giving Jews an average thermometer rating of 69. Only Jews themselves rate Jews more positively. But that warmth is not mutual: despite evangelicals’ warm feelings toward Jews, Jews tend to give evangelicals a much cooler rating (34 on average).

When asked about other non-Christian groups, evangelicals tend to express more negative views. White evangelicals assign Buddhists an average rating of 39, Hindus 38, Muslims 30 and atheists 25. The chilliness between evangelicals and atheists goes both ways. Atheists give evangelical Christians a cold rating of 28 on average.

Atheists give largely positive ratings to several non-Christian religious groups, including Buddhists (who receive an average rating of 69 from atheists), Jews (61) and Hindus (58). Atheists tend to give much cooler ratings to Muslims and the Christian groups asked about in the survey.


Atheists themselves are rated positively by atheists and agnostics, and they receive neutral ratings from Jews and those who describe their religion as “nothing in particular.” Atheists are rated much more negatively by other religious groups.

Christians and Jews Are Rated More Favorably by Older Americans Than by Younger People; Other Non-Christian Faiths Are Rated More Positively by Younger People

Christian groups and Jews receive higher ratings from older Americans (those ages 65 and older) than from younger Americans. By contrast, other non-Christian groups receive their highest ratings from younger Americans. Adults under the age of 30, for instance, give Muslims a neutral rating of 49, on average, whereas older adults give Muslims significantly more negative ratings (42 among those ages 30-49, 36 on average among those 50-64, and 32 among those 65 and older).

These patterns may partly reflect that there are more Christians among older Americans than among younger people. In Pew Research surveys conducted this year, fully 85% of Americans ages 65 and older describe themselves as Christians, compared with just 59% among adults under 30 (32% of whom identify as religious “nones”).

Jews Rated Most Positively by Whites; Evangelicals and Muslims Viewed More Favorably by Blacks than Whites

Jews receive their most positive ratings from whites, who give them an average rating of 66. Jews also are rated favorably by blacks and Hispanics (with each group giving Jews an average rating of 58). Evangelicals also are rated positively by all three groups, with their highest average rating coming from blacks (68). Muslims receive a neutral rating from blacks (49 on average), but they are rated more negatively by whites (38). Hispanics’ ratings of Muslims fall in between (43).

These findings may reflect the racial and ethnic composition of religious groups. Many blacks describe themselves as born-again or evangelical Christians, for instance, and 23% of Muslims in the U.S. are black, according to the Pew Research Center’s 2011 survey of Muslim Americans. Fully 94% of U.S. Jews are white, according to the Pew Research Center’s 2013 survey of U.S. Jews.

Republicans and those who lean toward the Republican Party tend to rate evangelicals very positively (71 on average). They also express warm feelings toward Jews (67 on average) and Catholics (66). The warmth Republicans feel for evangelicals may reflect the fact that many Republicans and Republican leaners are themselves evangelicals. Among those who are not evangelical Christians, evangelicals receive an average rating of 62. Mormons receive a neutral rating from Republicans and Republican leaners (52 on average), while Buddhists receive a rating of 49 and Hindus a rating of 47. Republicans and Republican leaners view atheists and Muslims much more negatively than they view other religious groups.

Democrats and Democratic leaners express warm feelings toward Jews (average rating of 62) and Catholics (61). Buddhists also are rated favorably (57 on average) by Democrats. Evangelicals receive an average rating of 53 from all Democrats and Democratic leaners, but this drops to 45 among those who are not evangelicals themselves. With the exception of Jews, all of the non-Christian groups asked about receive warmer ratings from Democrats and Democratic leaners than they do from Republicans.

Fully 87% of U.S. adults (including 85% of non-Catholics) say they personally know someone who is Catholic. And seven-in-ten people (including 63% of non-evangelicals) say they know someone who is an evangelical Christian. Because Catholics and evangelical Christians are such large groups, it is to be expected that most people would know someone from these groups.

Most Americans also say they know someone who is Jewish (61%) or an atheist (59%), even though these groups are much smaller than Catholics and evangelical Christians; roughly 2% of U.S. adults identify religiously as Jewish, and a little more than 2% identify as atheists. Other small groups are less familiar to most Americans. For example, 44% of Americans say they know someone who is Mormon, and 38% say they know someone who is Muslim. Mormons constitute about 2% of the U.S. adult population, and Muslims roughly 1%. Roughly one-in-four adults or fewer say they know a Buddhist (23%) or Hindu (22%); these groups each account for roughly 1% or less of the overall population.

Knowing someone from a religious group is linked with having relatively more positive views of that group. Those who say they know someone who is Jewish, for example, give Jews an average thermometer rating of 69, compared with a rating of 55 among those who say they do not know anyone who is Jewish. Atheists receive a neutral rating of 50, on average, from people who say they personally know an atheist, but they receive a cold rating of 29 from those who do not know an atheist. Similarly, Muslims get a neutral rating (49 on average) from those who know a Muslim, and a cooler rating (35) from those who do not know a Muslim.

Rony
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3281
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby Rony » 30 Jul 2014 20:03

Whiteness Is Still a Proxy for Being American

Anyone can make a fool of himself. So it’s tempting to dismiss last Thursday’s mega-gaffe by Florida Representative Curt Clawson as indicative of nothing more than the fallibility of the human brain.

But think about the nature of Clawson’s goof. Sitting across a congressional hearing room from Nisha Biswal, an official at the State Department, and Arun Kumar, who works at the Department of Commerce, Clawson addressed the two Indian-Americans as if they were representatives of the government of India. Which is to say: He had trouble recognizing that two Americans who trace their ancestry to the developing world are really American.

In today’s Republican Party, and beyond, a lot of people are having the same trouble. How else to explain the fact that, according to a 2011 New York Times/CBS poll, 45 percent of Republicans think President Obama was born outside the United States? Is it because they’re well versed in the details of which kind of birth certificate he released and when? Of course not. It’s because they see someone with his color skin and his kind of name and think: Doesn’t seem American to me.

In fact, Obama’s opponents, including Democrats, have been raising questions about his Americanness since he began seeking the presidency. In a March 2007 memo, Mark Penn, Hillary Clinton’s chief campaign strategist, argued that she should attack Obama for “not [being] at his center fundamentally American in his thinking and his values.” Had Obama been white and named Joe Smith, Penn’s line of attack would have been inconceivable, since Obama’s thinking and values were typical of a liberal Democrat’s, and similar to Clinton’s own. Penn’s effort to question Obama’s Americanness was entirely a function of the fact that he traced his ancestry to the third world and had spent some of his childhood abroad.

Since Obama defeated Hillary Clinton, it has been the Republicans’ turn. Newt Gingrich has claimed Obama possesses a “Kenyan, anti-colonial worldview.” Dick Cheney has said, “I don’t think that Barack Obama believes in the U.S. as an exceptional nation.” Indeed, a major thrust of the GOP’s attack on Obama is that he doesn’t understand America, doesn’t believe in America and wants to turn it into something fundamentally different from what it has always been. Bill Clinton, by contrast, was attacked relentlessly for his supposed lack of personal integrity and failure to serve in Vietnam. But conservatives rarely questioned his connection to the United States.

It’s not just Obama. In various ways in recent years, conservatives have questioned the Americanness of American Muslims. Michele Bachmann suggested that Huma Abedin and other Muslim-Americans serving in the national-security bureaucracy might be more loyal to foreign Islamist movements than to the United States. Another former Republican presidential candidate, Herman Cain, in 2011 said he would not appoint a Muslim to his cabinet because “Muslims in this country, some of them, try to force their Sharia law onto the rest of us.” A Public Religion Research Institute poll that same year found that 63 percent of Republicans believed Islam contradicts American values.

The link between the GOP’s tendency to question the Americanness of Muslim- Americans and Clawson’s assumption that the Indian-Americans sitting across from him were not American becomes clearer when you realize that in contemporary American discourse, “Muslim” is often seen as a race. Several of the most high-profile hate crimes committed in “retaliation” for 9/11 occurred not against Muslims but against South Asian Hindus or Sikhs. Representative Peter King has called for profiling suspected terrorists based upon their “religious background or ethnicity,” even though Islam is no more an ethnicity than is Christianity. The implication, of course, is that Muslims are brown.

One even sees traces of this tendency to un-Americanize immigrants from the developing world in the way some Americans see Hispanics. When Arizona in 2010 passed a law empowering law enforcement to detain anyone who presented a “reasonable suspicion” of being in the country illegally, critics rightly wondered what criteria the police could possibly use to suspect someone of being undocumented other than the fact that they looked or sounded Hispanic. A 2012 poll by the National Hispanic Media Coalition found that one-third of Americans believed most Hispanics in the United States were undocumented. In other words, many Americans associate being Hispanic with not being legally American. That’s pretty similar to the assumption Congressman Clawson made about Biswal and Kumar.

There’s no point in continuing to ridicule Clawson. Everyone’s entitled to a dumb mistake. But it’s worth noting how unlikely it is that he would have mistaken an Irish-American for a representative of the government of Ireland or a German-American for a representative of the government of Germany. Throughout our nation’s history, whiteness (itself a shifting category) has been used as a proxy for Americanness. And as Clawson reminded us last Thursday, it still is.

member_22733
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3788
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby member_22733 » 30 Jul 2014 23:34

^^^ There is a curious category that still passes off as American. That is "Black people". [Edited]
Last edited by ramana on 02 Aug 2014 01:47, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: ramana


Shreeman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3762
Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
Contact:

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby Shreeman » 01 Aug 2014 21:50

It is amazing, the effect shaming that biswal and kumar received, has on an individual.

Politicians are smart beings, it is a no holds barred dog eat dog world. And with sex thrown in the mix. US politics is uniquely colorful. Congressmen have been found hiding money in freezers too. So I do not buy the flori-duh excuse.

This was a cheap shot. I hope the extent of racism (the longing for the good old days of kkk and sslavery among a majority of the whites, however secret) dawna upon Biswaasl et al.

I have seen two types of reactions from thhis ssort -- people start calling a spade a spade, vocally; or if they are earhworms totally lacking a spine then eating the system from insid for personal benefit, further destroying any civil rights and continuing to know-tow the party line in public.

But at least the congresssman didnt call thrm his paki friends, so thats something.

Rony
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3281
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby Rony » 01 Aug 2014 23:29

Race is so central to American Soceity that even "well intentioned people" indulge in accidental racism without even realizing it.

If you are not white, you are not 'normal'
Image

Look at the price of white dolls vs black dolls of similar kind
Image


Image

member_22733
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3788
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Understanding the US-2

Postby member_22733 » 02 Aug 2014 00:12

Rony wrote:Race is so central to American Soceity that even "well intentioned people" indulge in accidental racism without even realizing it.


Yes. Comedian Hari Kondabolu says it perfectly in the below video: Saying that one is obsessed with race in America is like saying one is obsessed with swimming while drowning :rotfl:



As usual most new immigrants have no clue about this and they go all gung ho....


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Lisa, M_Joshi, madhu, rahulm and 95 guests