Hurricane Spinning: Maryland Gov Says Obama Speech Motivated People To Evacuate
August 27, 2011 No Comment
I know many people who would be prompted to flee at the prospect of an Obama speech.
Continue reading …
Secret document outlines party’s plan to launch campaign to brand prime minister as ‘recognisably rightwing’ leader Labour is developing a new strategy to paint David Cameron as an old-style, traditional Tory, according to confidential documents obtained by the Observer , as the parties prepare to do battle during the coming conference season. The opposition believes the prime minister has abandoned the centre ground in recent months to adopt a more orthodox conservative stance on issues such as law and order, immigration and welfare. They are now set to launch a concerted campaign to brand Cameron as a “recognisably rightwing” leader in a move that will inevitably inflame political debate. The creation of the strategy follows reports last month that Cameron had polled negatively for the first time, with more people saying that the prime minister was doing a bad job than those backing him. “Like first world war generals, we must avoid making all our preparations for the last battle rather than the next,” the leaked document says. “Indeed, the very terrain on which we will fight is changing.” The two-and-half-page paper written by the MP Shaun Woodward, a former Tory frontbencher and now head of Labour’s anti-Tory attack unit, and circulated among senior Labour officials, lays bare the areas where the opposition now believes Cameron is vulnerable. It asserts that the government’s recent rhetoric and policy offer a chance to frame Cameron as a traditional Tory prime minister, arguing that there is clear evidence that the party has “moved rapidly rightwards” in response to major events. In the wake of the riots, Cameron vowed to confront a “moral collapse” in British society while urging the courts to hand out tough sentences to those involved. Earlier this year he claimed that uncontrolled immigration threatened communities and their way of life in comments that his own business secretary, Vince Cable, said “risked inflaming extremism”. The document further claims the prime minister has moved away from pre-election priorities of being trusted on the NHS and the environment, both crucial areas of the “compassionate conservatism” that Cameron made central to his image. Woodward warns, however, that while there are opportunities for Labour there are “significant political risks if Labour fails to handle the change with alacrity, strength and sensitivity”. There are fears that some of the rightwing rhetoric employed by the government in recent months may chime with large sections of the public, as it did in the 1980s during Margaret Thatcher’s premiership. Senior figures in the party have also conceded that they have struggled to land a blow on Cameron, who is regarded as a skilful manipulator of his image. But in the document, which is likely to be presented to the full shadow cabinet in the coming weeks, Woodward appeals to the leadership to reassess the focus of its attacks. “At the last election we faced a Conservative party (and a Conservative leader in David Cameron) whose strategic goal was to decontaminate their brand, intending to present themselves as reformed, modern, centrist and pragmatic,” it says. “Repositioning on issues like the NHS and the environment was used as evidence of the emergence of a ‘compassionate conservatism’ – a phrase first used by George W Bush prior to his election as president. Cameron was effective in promoting a perception his party had changed.” But it adds: “Of course, in discussing how we frame out messages on the Conservatives it is important that anything we say is credible. We should not ignore there has been limited change on issues such as their attitude to gay rights and an attempt to embrace other aspects of a progressive social liberal agenda. “But here is the paradox: whilst the Tories made changes before the election – intended to convince the public they were compassionate – since the election (and especially in the last few months) the Tories have taken major strides back towards their ideological roots. Buffeted by events, there is a growing incoherence between ‘liberal conservatism’ and the increasingly shrill language the Tories are using as they vacate the centre ground.” It is also claimed that the focus on markets by health secretary Andrew Lansley, Michael Gove, the education secretary, and universities minister David Willetts is “very distant” from the voters’ aspirations for their public services. “Analysis of Tory party policy, carried out over the summer, convincingly demonstrates the Conservatives are shifting to a distinctly rightwing strategy, in both their chosen focus on issues and their solutions,” it says. “Cameron clearly recognises some of the danger he faces in his repositioning. He is still seeking to separate himself out from a toxic Tory brand and has assumed a presidential role and style. But the Tories have become far less worried about inhabiting the centre ground they once cultivated and more worried about any perception of appearing weak. “They do not appear to be seeking long-term solutions to Britain’s real challenges and problems and Cameron himself now appears to be a recognisably rightwing prime minister.” Labour David Cameron Conservatives Daniel Boffey guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Secret document outlines party’s plan to launch campaign to brand prime minister as ‘recognisably rightwing’ leader Labour is developing a new strategy to paint David Cameron as an old-style, traditional Tory, according to confidential documents obtained by the Observer , as the parties prepare to do battle during the coming conference season. The opposition believes the prime minister has abandoned the centre ground in recent months to adopt a more orthodox conservative stance on issues such as law and order, immigration and welfare. They are now set to launch a concerted campaign to brand Cameron as a “recognisably rightwing” leader in a move that will inevitably inflame political debate. The creation of the strategy follows reports last month that Cameron had polled negatively for the first time, with more people saying that the prime minister was doing a bad job than those backing him. “Like first world war generals, we must avoid making all our preparations for the last battle rather than the next,” the leaked document says. “Indeed, the very terrain on which we will fight is changing.” The two-and-half-page paper written by the MP Shaun Woodward, a former Tory frontbencher and now head of Labour’s anti-Tory attack unit, and circulated among senior Labour officials, lays bare the areas where the opposition now believes Cameron is vulnerable. It asserts that the government’s recent rhetoric and policy offer a chance to frame Cameron as a traditional Tory prime minister, arguing that there is clear evidence that the party has “moved rapidly rightwards” in response to major events. In the wake of the riots, Cameron vowed to confront a “moral collapse” in British society while urging the courts to hand out tough sentences to those involved. Earlier this year he claimed that uncontrolled immigration threatened communities and their way of life in comments that his own business secretary, Vince Cable, said “risked inflaming extremism”. The document further claims the prime minister has moved away from pre-election priorities of being trusted on the NHS and the environment, both crucial areas of the “compassionate conservatism” that Cameron made central to his image. Woodward warns, however, that while there are opportunities for Labour there are “significant political risks if Labour fails to handle the change with alacrity, strength and sensitivity”. There are fears that some of the rightwing rhetoric employed by the government in recent months may chime with large sections of the public, as it did in the 1980s during Margaret Thatcher’s premiership. Senior figures in the party have also conceded that they have struggled to land a blow on Cameron, who is regarded as a skilful manipulator of his image. But in the document, which is likely to be presented to the full shadow cabinet in the coming weeks, Woodward appeals to the leadership to reassess the focus of its attacks. “At the last election we faced a Conservative party (and a Conservative leader in David Cameron) whose strategic goal was to decontaminate their brand, intending to present themselves as reformed, modern, centrist and pragmatic,” it says. “Repositioning on issues like the NHS and the environment was used as evidence of the emergence of a ‘compassionate conservatism’ – a phrase first used by George W Bush prior to his election as president. Cameron was effective in promoting a perception his party had changed.” But it adds: “Of course, in discussing how we frame out messages on the Conservatives it is important that anything we say is credible. We should not ignore there has been limited change on issues such as their attitude to gay rights and an attempt to embrace other aspects of a progressive social liberal agenda. “But here is the paradox: whilst the Tories made changes before the election – intended to convince the public they were compassionate – since the election (and especially in the last few months) the Tories have taken major strides back towards their ideological roots. Buffeted by events, there is a growing incoherence between ‘liberal conservatism’ and the increasingly shrill language the Tories are using as they vacate the centre ground.” It is also claimed that the focus on markets by health secretary Andrew Lansley, Michael Gove, the education secretary, and universities minister David Willetts is “very distant” from the voters’ aspirations for their public services. “Analysis of Tory party policy, carried out over the summer, convincingly demonstrates the Conservatives are shifting to a distinctly rightwing strategy, in both their chosen focus on issues and their solutions,” it says. “Cameron clearly recognises some of the danger he faces in his repositioning. He is still seeking to separate himself out from a toxic Tory brand and has assumed a presidential role and style. But the Tories have become far less worried about inhabiting the centre ground they once cultivated and more worried about any perception of appearing weak. “They do not appear to be seeking long-term solutions to Britain’s real challenges and problems and Cameron himself now appears to be a recognisably rightwing prime minister.” Labour David Cameron Conservatives Daniel Boffey guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Secret document outlines party’s plan to launch campaign to brand prime minister as ‘recognisably rightwing’ leader Labour is developing a new strategy to paint David Cameron as an old-style, traditional Tory, according to confidential documents obtained by the Observer , as the parties prepare to do battle during the coming conference season. The opposition believes the prime minister has abandoned the centre ground in recent months to adopt a more orthodox conservative stance on issues such as law and order, immigration and welfare. They are now set to launch a concerted campaign to brand Cameron as a “recognisably rightwing” leader in a move that will inevitably inflame political debate. The creation of the strategy follows reports last month that Cameron had polled negatively for the first time, with more people saying that the prime minister was doing a bad job than those backing him. “Like first world war generals, we must avoid making all our preparations for the last battle rather than the next,” the leaked document says. “Indeed, the very terrain on which we will fight is changing.” The two-and-half-page paper written by the MP Shaun Woodward, a former Tory frontbencher and now head of Labour’s anti-Tory attack unit, and circulated among senior Labour officials, lays bare the areas where the opposition now believes Cameron is vulnerable. It asserts that the government’s recent rhetoric and policy offer a chance to frame Cameron as a traditional Tory prime minister, arguing that there is clear evidence that the party has “moved rapidly rightwards” in response to major events. In the wake of the riots, Cameron vowed to confront a “moral collapse” in British society while urging the courts to hand out tough sentences to those involved. Earlier this year he claimed that uncontrolled immigration threatened communities and their way of life in comments that his own business secretary, Vince Cable, said “risked inflaming extremism”. The document further claims the prime minister has moved away from pre-election priorities of being trusted on the NHS and the environment, both crucial areas of the “compassionate conservatism” that Cameron made central to his image. Woodward warns, however, that while there are opportunities for Labour there are “significant political risks if Labour fails to handle the change with alacrity, strength and sensitivity”. There are fears that some of the rightwing rhetoric employed by the government in recent months may chime with large sections of the public, as it did in the 1980s during Margaret Thatcher’s premiership. Senior figures in the party have also conceded that they have struggled to land a blow on Cameron, who is regarded as a skilful manipulator of his image. But in the document, which is likely to be presented to the full shadow cabinet in the coming weeks, Woodward appeals to the leadership to reassess the focus of its attacks. “At the last election we faced a Conservative party (and a Conservative leader in David Cameron) whose strategic goal was to decontaminate their brand, intending to present themselves as reformed, modern, centrist and pragmatic,” it says. “Repositioning on issues like the NHS and the environment was used as evidence of the emergence of a ‘compassionate conservatism’ – a phrase first used by George W Bush prior to his election as president. Cameron was effective in promoting a perception his party had changed.” But it adds: “Of course, in discussing how we frame out messages on the Conservatives it is important that anything we say is credible. We should not ignore there has been limited change on issues such as their attitude to gay rights and an attempt to embrace other aspects of a progressive social liberal agenda. “But here is the paradox: whilst the Tories made changes before the election – intended to convince the public they were compassionate – since the election (and especially in the last few months) the Tories have taken major strides back towards their ideological roots. Buffeted by events, there is a growing incoherence between ‘liberal conservatism’ and the increasingly shrill language the Tories are using as they vacate the centre ground.” It is also claimed that the focus on markets by health secretary Andrew Lansley, Michael Gove, the education secretary, and universities minister David Willetts is “very distant” from the voters’ aspirations for their public services. “Analysis of Tory party policy, carried out over the summer, convincingly demonstrates the Conservatives are shifting to a distinctly rightwing strategy, in both their chosen focus on issues and their solutions,” it says. “Cameron clearly recognises some of the danger he faces in his repositioning. He is still seeking to separate himself out from a toxic Tory brand and has assumed a presidential role and style. But the Tories have become far less worried about inhabiting the centre ground they once cultivated and more worried about any perception of appearing weak. “They do not appear to be seeking long-term solutions to Britain’s real challenges and problems and Cameron himself now appears to be a recognisably rightwing prime minister.” Labour David Cameron Conservatives Daniel Boffey guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Secret document outlines party’s plan to launch campaign to brand prime minister as ‘recognisably rightwing’ leader Labour is developing a new strategy to paint David Cameron as an old-style, traditional Tory, according to confidential documents obtained by the Observer , as the parties prepare to do battle during the coming conference season. The opposition believes the prime minister has abandoned the centre ground in recent months to adopt a more orthodox conservative stance on issues such as law and order, immigration and welfare. They are now set to launch a concerted campaign to brand Cameron as a “recognisably rightwing” leader in a move that will inevitably inflame political debate. The creation of the strategy follows reports last month that Cameron had polled negatively for the first time, with more people saying that the prime minister was doing a bad job than those backing him. “Like first world war generals, we must avoid making all our preparations for the last battle rather than the next,” the leaked document says. “Indeed, the very terrain on which we will fight is changing.” The two-and-half-page paper written by the MP Shaun Woodward, a former Tory frontbencher and now head of Labour’s anti-Tory attack unit, and circulated among senior Labour officials, lays bare the areas where the opposition now believes Cameron is vulnerable. It asserts that the government’s recent rhetoric and policy offer a chance to frame Cameron as a traditional Tory prime minister, arguing that there is clear evidence that the party has “moved rapidly rightwards” in response to major events. In the wake of the riots, Cameron vowed to confront a “moral collapse” in British society while urging the courts to hand out tough sentences to those involved. Earlier this year he claimed that uncontrolled immigration threatened communities and their way of life in comments that his own business secretary, Vince Cable, said “risked inflaming extremism”. The document further claims the prime minister has moved away from pre-election priorities of being trusted on the NHS and the environment, both crucial areas of the “compassionate conservatism” that Cameron made central to his image. Woodward warns, however, that while there are opportunities for Labour there are “significant political risks if Labour fails to handle the change with alacrity, strength and sensitivity”. There are fears that some of the rightwing rhetoric employed by the government in recent months may chime with large sections of the public, as it did in the 1980s during Margaret Thatcher’s premiership. Senior figures in the party have also conceded that they have struggled to land a blow on Cameron, who is regarded as a skilful manipulator of his image. But in the document, which is likely to be presented to the full shadow cabinet in the coming weeks, Woodward appeals to the leadership to reassess the focus of its attacks. “At the last election we faced a Conservative party (and a Conservative leader in David Cameron) whose strategic goal was to decontaminate their brand, intending to present themselves as reformed, modern, centrist and pragmatic,” it says. “Repositioning on issues like the NHS and the environment was used as evidence of the emergence of a ‘compassionate conservatism’ – a phrase first used by George W Bush prior to his election as president. Cameron was effective in promoting a perception his party had changed.” But it adds: “Of course, in discussing how we frame out messages on the Conservatives it is important that anything we say is credible. We should not ignore there has been limited change on issues such as their attitude to gay rights and an attempt to embrace other aspects of a progressive social liberal agenda. “But here is the paradox: whilst the Tories made changes before the election – intended to convince the public they were compassionate – since the election (and especially in the last few months) the Tories have taken major strides back towards their ideological roots. Buffeted by events, there is a growing incoherence between ‘liberal conservatism’ and the increasingly shrill language the Tories are using as they vacate the centre ground.” It is also claimed that the focus on markets by health secretary Andrew Lansley, Michael Gove, the education secretary, and universities minister David Willetts is “very distant” from the voters’ aspirations for their public services. “Analysis of Tory party policy, carried out over the summer, convincingly demonstrates the Conservatives are shifting to a distinctly rightwing strategy, in both their chosen focus on issues and their solutions,” it says. “Cameron clearly recognises some of the danger he faces in his repositioning. He is still seeking to separate himself out from a toxic Tory brand and has assumed a presidential role and style. But the Tories have become far less worried about inhabiting the centre ground they once cultivated and more worried about any perception of appearing weak. “They do not appear to be seeking long-term solutions to Britain’s real challenges and problems and Cameron himself now appears to be a recognisably rightwing prime minister.” Labour David Cameron Conservatives Daniel Boffey guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Chancellor describes tax evasion as ‘morally repugnant’ after announcing deal with secretive Swiss banks Fresh from negotiating a new deal with secretive Swiss banks, George Osborne has warned top earners who attempt to avoid tax that the government “will find you and your
Continue reading …CFAP Report: $42 Million From Seven Foundations Helped Fuel The Rise Of Islamophobia In America
August 27, 2011 No Comment
Click here to view this media Keith Olbermann talked to ThinkProgress ‘ Faiz Shakir who helped author a new report from the Center for American Progress — REPORT: $42 Million From Seven Foundations Helped Fuel The Rise Of Islamophobia In America : Following a six-month long investigative research project, the Center for American Progress released a 130-page report today which reveals that more than $42 million from seven foundations over the past decade have helped fan the flames of anti-Muslim hate in America. The authors — Wajahat Ali, Eli Clifton, Matt Duss, Lee Fang, Scott Keyes, and myself — worked to expose the Islamophobia network in depth, name the major players, connect the dots, and trace the genesis of anti-Muslim propaganda. The report, titled “ Fear Inc.: The Roots Of the Islamophobia Network In America ,” lifts the veil behind the hate, follows the money, and identifies the names of foundations who have given money, how much they have given, and who they have given to The money has flowed into the hands of five key “experts” and “scholars” who comprise the central nervous system of anti-Muslim propaganda: FRANK GAFFNEY , Center for Security Policy – “A mosque that is used to promote a seditious program, which is what Sharia is… that is not a protected religious practice, that is in fact sedition. ” [ Source ] DAVID YERUSHALMI , Society of Americans for National Existence: “Muslim civilization is at war with Judeo-Christian civilization…the Muslim peoples, those committed to Islam as we know it today, are our enemies. ” [ Source ] DANIEL PIPES , Middle East Forum: “All immigrants bring exotic customs and attitudes, but Muslim customs are more troublesome than most. ” [ Source ] ROBERT SPENCER , Jihad Watch: “Of course, as I have pointed out many times, traditional Islam itself is not moderate or peaceful. It is the only major world religion with a developed doctrine and tradition of warfare against unbelievers.” [ Source ] STEVEN EMERSON , Investigative Project on Terrorism: “One of the world’s great religions — which has more than 1.4 billion adherents — somehow sanctions genocide, planned genocide, as part of its religious doctrine. ” [ Source ] These five “scholars” are assisted in their outreach efforts by Brigitte Gabriel (founder, ACT! for America), Pamela Geller (co-founder, Stop Islamization of America), and David Horowitz (supporter of Robert Spencer’s Jihad Watch). As the report details, information is then disseminated through conservative organizations like the Eagle Forum, the religious right, Fox News, and politicians such as Allen West and Newt Gingrich. Much more there including a summary of these foundations, their donation amounts and who the recipients are, so go read the rest. As Shakir relayed to Keith, this report by no means is a complete list of every corporation or group that is contributing to the fearmongering Islamophobia we’ve seen in recent years, but exposing some of these groups they’ve uncovered so far might help put an end to some of this if they are forced to associate their names with this type of hatred. And as Shakir also noted in the interview, one of them already contacted the CFAP off the record and said they were unaware of where their donations were going. As he told Keith, they said to them, now might be a good time to cut off their funding if that is the case.
Continue reading …On Tuesday, NPR ombudsman Edward Schumacher-Matos reached back to a July 26 story on the horrific shootings in Norway. Correspondent Sylvia Poggioli suggested the shooter, Anders Breivik “once belonged to the ultra-right Progress Party.” Schumacher-Matos lamented the “ultra-right” label, and asked Poggioli to explain herself. He called it “ultra-wrong.” It quickly became clear that Poggioli saw “ultra” extremism in the party's opposition to Islam and immigration. The ombudsman posting including just a few paragraphs of what Poggioli wrote in her own defense. But at the bottom of the page, he posted the whole reply , and her affinity for left-wing rags like the Nation and “far right” labels became really obvious: Until recently, radical right-wing parties were marginalized and considered disreputable. For example, Norway's Progress Party—of which Breivik used to be a member—was isolated. Its anti-immigrant rhetoric made it a pariah party. The arrival over the last two decades of millions of immigrants—mostly Muslims—on a continent where the nation-state had been based on mono-ethnic societies, has given new impetus to the ultra-right parties . The turning points were the Islamist terrorist acts of 9/11, the murder of Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh (2004) and the Madrid and London bombings (2004, 2005). As Ian Buruma writes in The Nation, “this finally gave right-wing populists a cause withwhich to crash into the center of European politics.” This is what writer Kenan Malik said in a NYT forum on this topic: “ Far right parties throughout Europe draw upon two distinct constituencies. The first is a core of hardline racist bigots — many of these parties, like the British National Party andthe Sweden Democrats emerged out of the neo-fascist swamp and some still live there.The bigots, however, have been joined by a swathe of new supporters whose hostility toward immigrants, minorities and Muslims is shaped less by old-fashioned racism than by a newfangled sense of fear and insecurity.
Continue reading …
Russian aerospace engineers join race to provide wealthy thrill-seekers with the ultimate holiday destination Russian engineers have announced the ultimate get-away-from-it-all holiday, revealing plans to put a hotel into orbit 200 miles above Earth by 2016. The four-room Hotel in the Heavens would house up to seven guests who would be able to cavort in zero-gravity while watching as our planet turns. The out-of-this-world experience will not come cheaply, however. Space tourists will have to pay £500,000 to travel on a Soyuz rocket to get to the hotel before stumping up a further £100,000 for a five-day stay. “The hotel will be aimed at wealthy individuals and people working for private companies who want to do research in space,” said Sergei Kostenko, chief executive of Orbital Technologies, which will construct the orbiting guest house. “A hotel should be comfortable, and this one will be.” The news that Russia plans to launch a hotel into outer space is the latest example in a series of extreme holidaymaking projects. As the world accumulates more and more billionaires, entrepreneurs are seeking newer and more demanding ways to provide them with the ultimate in hi-tech thrills. Apart from space hotels, which have also been touted recently by US and European aerospace companies, proposals to fly thrill-seekers on rocket flights to the edge of space are now being finalised by Richard Branson’s Virgin Galactic as well as by US companies such as Space Adventures, Armadillo Aerospace and XCOR Aerospace. In addition, billionaires may soon be able to buy their own artificial countries – built in international waters on oil rig-type platforms – where they can indulge in their dictatorial fantasies. Or they could buy high-performance submarines that will allow them to dive and explore the deepest parts of oceans. Being rich has never offered so many opportunities for adventure – and excess. In the case of the space hotels, hedonism will be limited, however. Orbital Technologies have made it clear that guests will be restricted to consuming iced tea and fruit juices for their liquid intake. Alcohol will be banned. In addition, waste water will be recycled while air will be filtered to remove odour and bacteria and then returned to cabins. Tourists, accompanied by experienced crew, will also have to dine on food prepared on Earth and reheated in microwave ovens, while showers will be carefully sealed affairs to prevent water escaping as globules that otherwise would float around the hotel’s interior. It is scarcely five-star luxury. On the other hand, there will be many compensations. Views of the Earth from the space hotel’s special observation windows should be breathtaking as the craft whizzes round our planet every 90 minutes – providing guests with 16 sunsets and 16 sunrises a day. Visitors will also be able to choose to have their beds vertically or horizontally inclined to their line of flight. Indeed, the prospect of weightlessness offers all sorts of zero-gravity activities that can only be dreamt of on Earth. By contrast, the pleasures offered for those who go on suborbital flights offered by Virgin Galactic will be over far more quickly. Launched on craft pioneered by aviation designer Burt Rutan, these craft will allow passengers to slip the surly bonds of the gravitational field for only a few minutes before their rocket-powered craft descends back to Earth. On the other hand, the company’s plans are far more advanced than those put forward by most other space tourism entrepreneurs. Branson says Virgin Galactic’s first flights should begin next year. Tickets will cost a mere $200,000, with celebrities such as Paris Hilton, Tom Hanks and Stephen Hawking signing up for early flights. If that doesn’t appeal, Peter Thiel – who co-founded PayPal and who was one of Facebook’s earliest backers – has revealed that he wants to create communities that would be run according to extreme laissez-faire ideals. According to Details magazine, he wants to build artificial islands – based on oil-rig designs – that would be a “kind of floating Petri dish for implementing policies that libertarians, stymied by indifference at the voting booths, have been unable to advance: no welfare, looser building codes, no minimum wage and few restrictions on weapons.” A billionaire’s dream venture, in other words. And then there is the prospect of taking to the ocean depths in a range of new submersibles that will use ultra-strong materials to withstand the incredible pressures found at the deepest parts of the oceans. Again these are aimed for sale to the planet’s richest inhabitants. “Ninety per cent of the sea bed has still to be explored,” said Patrick Lahey, president of Triton Submarines of Vero Beach, Florida, one of the leading companies involved in building such submersibles. “There is a host of wonders down there. You could cruise down to the wrecks of the Titanic or the Bismarck. You will be able to access any place in the ocean and watch all those wonderful sea creatures.” Space Russia Richard Branson Virgin Group Europe Robin McKie guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …While I'm sure religiously conservative African-Americans would vehemently disagree, the editors of the Washington Post's On Faith page seem to think that the struggle to desegregate the American church in the 1960s and the battle to have openly gay clergy in the pulpit are similar and equally predicated on a notion of fidelity to the teachings of Christ. The day before the Martin Luther King Jr. memorial was originally scheduled to be dedicated, the On Faith page of Saturday's Washington Post published an obituary of a Methodist minister written by a liberal clergyman who equated a push for gay clergy as akin to struggles within Methodist churches to tear down the walls of segregation that used to keep black preachers out of the pulpits of predominantly white Methodist churches. “On Faith” did not publish an article to counter that there's a huge difference between discriminating in church on the basis of race or ethnicity and disqualifying an openly gay person from serving in the clergy. In “His work lives on,” Foundry United Methodist pastor Rev. Dean Snyder marked the August 12 passing of W. Astor Kirk, a Methodist minister who played a key role in ensuring that the United Methodist Church would be desegregated. But Snyder seemed most impressed with how Dr. Kirk went on to become an advocate for openly homosexual and lesbian ministers in the church pulpit, authoring a resolution that will be debated at the United Methodist Church's convention next spring in Tampa which mandates the church “to abolish ecclesiastical institutional discrimination against members of The United Methodist Church. . . commonly referred to as ‘homosexuals.'” “It has been my honor to be his pastor and friend this past decade. I am convinced his struggle for a truly inclusive United Methodist Church will prevail,” Snyder concluded his article.
Continue reading …