Obamacare (cue the Halloween/scary music)

The Supreme Court is hearing arguments on the Affordable Health Care Act, or Obamacare as Republicans call it.

They oppose the individual mandate by calling it socialism. The funny thing is that it was their idea in the '90s and it was all good- a way to protect small businesses--- then. What was that other thing they call socialist? Oh. Taxes. I'm sure there are more.

Making everyone opt in is not a new concept. Car insurance is the same. You are required to have this if you have a car. I realize this is regulated by the states and not federal, so this may make all the difference to a Republican, but it is the same concept to me. Everyone pays who may have to use it at some point to cover the costs of those that do. If you choose to go without and then have an accident, no one is required to cover your cost, unlike in a medical situation where doctors are required to treat you, so the need for the individual mandate seems to be greatest in this case. Why so little complaint about car insurance and so much about everyone being required to have health insurance, something that you'll probably use more than car insurance and for something you're guaranteed service for?

Republicans are against welfare and other social programs because it is a free ride. They have no problem with people who don't get insurance while they're healthy or apparently healthy, then go when the problems can't be ignored and have ballooned into something uncontrollable at everyone else's expense because- hey- I didn't see this coming- I'm healthy- I can't afford this- I need help. Is that not the point of insurance, to pay into it before you need it? Take for example life insurance or car insurance. (Yes, I realize life insurance is totally optional and car insurance is regulated by the state, but I'm talking about the allegedly strange new socialist concept of pooling resources.) I would think Republicans would be for something that prevents people from gaming the system and getting services they never intended to pay for (either because they couldn't or because they thought they didn't need it just yet).

Or maybe I have it wrong and Republicans would like to do away with the concept of doctors helping those who can't pay. I admit I don't know their position on that. I'd be curious to find that out.

Or I wonder if the individual mandate gets struck down if people who opt out could carry a card that says- I waive my right/wish to be treated- so the cost wouldn't be incurred. I'm pretty sure that wouldn't affect the doctors' responsibility to treat people, though. Besides it makes me feel kind of horrible just writing that. I definitely believe those who can't afford it should be subsidized and treated, but those who opt out because they're feeling fine now or oppose it ideologically or opt out for another reason than financial need...maybe I don't feel that bad writing it.

Children's literature about Palestinians/ Arab culture

We had considered attending a Girl Scout event at school where admission was a new or gently used book to donate to the school district. Other things intervened, so we didn't go, but I thought about what I would have liked to donate and may yet still. 

Arabs are under represented in literature and human interest stories and over represented in coverage of terrorist acts and war, so this got me thinking and searching. I didn't come up with a ton, but I suppose I could still donate to the school district or public library. Or just get for my own kids for summer or supplementary reading...

Elementary:

One City, Two Brothers by Chris Smith......................ages 6 and up

The Butter Man by Elizabeth Alalou & Ali Alalou .....Kindergarten and up

Sitti's Secrets by Naomi Shihab Nye .........................ages 5 and up

Snow in Jerusalem by Deborah DeCosta ...................ages 6-10

Mystery Bottle by Kristen Balouch ............................K - grade 3

Late Elementary- Middle School:

Figs and Fate (5 short stories) by Elsa Marston ......grades 4-8

A Little Piece of Ground by Elizabeth Laird ....... grades 4 and up (ages 9 and up)

The Grand Mosque of Paris: A Story of How Muslims Rescued Jews During the Holocaust ............................................................ grade 3 and up (age 8 and up)

---

Running on Eggs by Anna Levine .......................grades 5 and up (ages 10 and up)

Habibi by Naomi Shihab Nye ...................................grades 5-9

A Bottle in the Gaza Sea by Valerie Zennatti ............grades 6-8

If You Could Be My Friend by Mervet A. Sha'ban.....grades 6-10

A Stone in My Hand by Cathryn Clinton ...........grades 6 and up (ages 11 and up)

Also interesting for a classroom, maybe...

http://www.adc.org/education/arab-contributions-to-civilization/

I guess high school suggestions might be the same as adult suggestions? I have no idea.

Mornings In Jenin by Susan Abulhawa

Bastard of Istanbul by Elif Shafak

maybe Miral... you could do a movie compare/contrast...

Crescent by Diana Abu-Jaber (The Language of Baklava or Aarbian Jazz may also be good)

Sharon and My Mother-in-Law: Ramallah Diaries by Suad Amiry

It's Easier to Reach Heaven Than the End of the Street: A Jerusalem Memoir by Emma Williams

The Lemon Tree by Sandy Tolan

***

Edit 3/12/12: Some very good points recently were made with regard to the wrong and right way to do things of this nature. I agree completely. 

If I'm (or you're) going to donate, I will definitely have to go about it in the correct way so as not to just drop books in administrators' lap for them to possibly interpret as some sort of a sinister agenda. I don't know that I necessarily have the tools for this, so maybe I will just buy some for my own kids...


The donation(s) would, I suppose, need to be in the context of a dialogue about diversity (in a broader sense than maybe we tend to think about). We need to discuss and read about Arabs who aren't engaged in terrorism -get beyond the stereotype- since we have been engaged in the Middle East more prominently since ~2001. A general trend with various wars we have been engaged in  is that we tend to see more people from those regions in the US in later years. I think it would benefit everyone to get a complete picture of the people we generally see portrayed in only one way in this country.

I don't know that donating one book would have an ill effect- which was more in line with my original thought that kind of turned into... what if all these were available for kids and teachers... Oh well. I will keep brainstorming I guess- I can't stop thinking sometimes. They aren't all good ideas, but maybe I'll hit on something one day.

Obama Netanyahu meeting

So, these guys met again yesterday. Why do we agree to meet and grovel to a war criminal?? I don't know. That's American politics. I won't quote Churchill with the riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma, but ...  :)

A link for the meeting...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-17260083

I don't know if it was supposed to be a general meeting on all issues, but if it was, Netanyahu succeeded in steering the conversation away from Palestinians to focus on Iran. Very convenient, given how someone involved in ethnic cleansing may not be in a strong position to demand we make good on our pledge to always support Israel - they are on the verge of "annihilation". When is the existential threat lie going to go the way of the boy who cried wolf? How many times will it take? There has not been an existential threat against Jews since Hitler, yet Israel cries wolf all the time- Palestinians Iraq, Iran, etc. Very interesting it is that Israel always berates us for not being "Johnny on the spot" whenever it perceives an "existential threat" (we actually are, but since we aren't pre-emptively striking everyone who talks dirty and we occasionally express concern about illegal settlements, they perceive it differently) while being involved in Judaizing neighborhoods, fixing visa laws such that Palestinians can't come back home, refusing to allow refugees back since 1948, and built their state on ethnic cleansing campaigns that involved blowing up innocent peoples houses and killing women and children intentionally to scare others away.

Aside from ignoring Israel's war crimes and treating them like a nation that deserves normal relations and our blind and full support, Obama did a good job repeating his desire for diplomacy and establishing our position that the time for war has not yet come. Netanyahu was ready for war a long time ago. They are always ready for war. They are a military society. I don't even know if they have any diplomats or know what that is.

I think it was wrong not to talk about the Palestinians because the Iran "problem" ties into it. I mean, if Israel had let refugees back after 1948 and all of the conflicts and was a democracy for it's citizens and not just for Jews, Iran would feel less like attacking a state in which Arabs were participating. And perhaps the Arabs would help moderate Israel's rhetoric and positions and would be able to conduct diplomacy with Iran instead of just threatening war all the time. Israel as it is today is really no better or more rational than Iran. They kind of mirror each other in a kind of weird way. They both threaten war all the time and support terrorism in indirect ways and tolerate extremism in government. The only difference is we accept Israel as a normal, Western nation and see Iran for what it is.

Israel as a state for Jews rather than ALL of its citizens is kind of a common denominator for conflict in the Middle East. They are either fighting with another country, exchanging heated rhetoric, or selling arms and info to both sides to keep other parties fighting. It all boils down to "defending" (and I use the term very loosely as they do with demographics) a majority Jewish state in a predominantly Arab area on a land they ethnically cleansed to create. Israel uses the term defense interchangeably for life and the Jewish majority it works hard to keep by illegal and lethal means, which makes some of their cries of annihilation a bit ridiculous, sadly, because that kind of thing shouldn't be spoken of so lightly.

There has always been a discrepancy between the facts and what Israel tells the public to rile them up. Even before 1948, in public, leaders spoke of annihilation and death and destruction and second Holocaust; in private meetings and military planning, they knew they had the advantage militarily and politically. Things have not changed one bit. They are the world's 4th largest military power and yet continually say they are under an existential threat, people want to push them into the sea, and all manner of doomsday scenarios. Particularly disgusting, though, is not just that discrepancy in facts, but that they are actually at the same time engaged in threatening others' existence and expunging them from the history of the region

(For more on Israel's intent and plans in and around the 1900s, read Ilan Pappe, Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine.)

While I know that Obama is obligated to state the obvious (we support Israel- if you write to Congress on any Middle East issue, you will clearly learn that, if nothing else) and grovel and reassure Israel that we have their back even amid accusations by the right, AIPAC, and Israel that America under Obama isn't supporting Israel the way they want. How they can make such demands coming from a state built on ethnic cleansing and still engaging in illegal and immoral acts absolutely defies logic. I realize presidents have to do that to get elected, but why don't politicians get together and stand up to Israel in a effort to do right by our own citizens? That way, no one would be standing out on a limb election-wise and the American people would get money for our health care and education rather than supporting ethnic cleansing and apartheid overseas. It's a win-win.

Other nations with human rights issues and UN violations, we maintain a workable but frosty relationship with. In the case of Israel, they accuse us of not supporting them, and we seemingly have no choice but to promise greater love and support despite illegal activity (both the acts we acknowledge and oppose and those we tend to ignore...). What is wrong with us? Why can't we see how backwards this is??

The ONLY thing under existential threat is possibly the myths that Israel was ever under existential threat of a second Holocaust, that it didn't actually make the desert bloom, that it didn't expel, kill and terrorize most Palestinians to seize a state for Jews only, that it didn't engage in ethnic cleansing or doesn't today, etc as people gradually wake up and read for themselves about history and the issue instead of trusting famous pastors and politicians to draw conclusions and think for them.

pen pals... not just for kids

I have written a few times about starting some kind of activism that involves Americans and Palestinians talking...

I'll repost the second half of this fair trade post here, since I should have separated them in the first place:

*** *** ***
I'm not exactly the go-getter type, but I think from time to time about stuff like this or getting something going. Petitioning the government is certainly (or seems so) one way to influence policy, but if Americans are talking to Palestinians and start to see them as people with perhaps more in common with themselves than they think (rather than The Others, terrorists, etc), maybe this will make people re-think the "Israel's way or the highway" mentality that holds us captive and causes common sense to escape us.

Here goes:
I have heard of (and have been inspired by) various efforts lately to aid Palestine like Galloway's convoy, Kite Gang (NPR), Gaza Surf Relief, etc:
http://www.vivapalestina.org/events.htm,
(edit 7/2009- A convoy actually left the US on July 4 and went to Gaza July 13)

http://www.kitegang.org/what_we_do/jordan
(http://thestory.org/archive/the_story_496_Kites_and_Plastic.mp3/view ),

http://www.gazasurfrelief.com/Start.html ,

https://www.canaanfairtrade.com/about ,

various programs among elementary students/schools from the US and Palestine exchanging letters, pictures, goodies, etc (why don't cities or peace groups in the two areas do the same sorts of things?)
*Facebook comments about Flat Stanleys around that time kind of re-inspired that one. I thought- what if Flat Stanley went to a Free Gaza event or protest...

and even http://www.provoforpalestine.org/ (go figure!)

And with that, I'm all brainstormed out. Maybe something will come of it one day. If not from me, then from someone reading this. I feel less cluttered having put all this on "paper", so I guess I've accomplished something.

*** *** ***

And recently, I signed up with postcrossing, which is really cool, but you just can't choose what country you write to (though I wouldn't want to change the randomness of that particular site). It is kind of the thing I had envisioned finding or starting for US-Palestine.

There are programs for student pen pals on this site:  http://www.twinningwithpalestine.net/ , that I linked to in my BDS post.

And I found this one, Pen Pals for Peace, for students as well: http://www.ippnw-students.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=59&Itemid=65

This one sounds great, but I do believe it's only for students.

I had wanted my chapter of Al-Awda or other group to maybe start a subgroup that would write (men to men, women to women) letters and postcards (actual, not electronic) to tell about life, news, and whatever else in their country (Palestine- US exchange).

If that worked, I had wanted to try and get people who don't know or think much about the conflict on a daily basis involved for the educational and outreach experience. People in the US sometimes just buy into the "Israel is always right" (or Arabs are always wrong) line of thinking simply because they don't hear anyone or anything challenging that and causing them to evaluate it.

time magazine- the upside of being an introvert

I posted a bit on this in November. 

Time Magazine - 'The Upside Of Being An Introvert.' 

I hear others talk about being shy or how we must get out of our comfort zone, but I don't think they know the half of it sometimes. These things mean entirely different things to introverts and extroverts. Not that we introverts shouldn't try and get out of the comfort zone once in a while, but our culture is such that we are often expected to live outside of it- and the thought of being expected to go even further out of it sometimes makes me want to blow a gasket. Ok. More realistically, it makes me want to disengage.

Maybe I'll start with the quiz. Of course there is a quiz! 

Some of the items made me smile. You let calls go to voicemail. I hate to admit it, but can't deny that one. I don't do the phone thing unless I have to. 

Prefer writing to talking, enjoy solitude, etc. Of course! This is one of the main reasons this blog exists. The usual suspects when you're talking about introverts.

It was interesting to find that being "less concerned with wealth, fame and status" is a trait of introverts. I have spent a lot of time thinking about why these things are important and tempting to so many and why I am so uninterested in them (i.e. What's wrong with me?? Where's my ambition??). 

Dislike small talk, but enjoy talking in depth about what matters to me. 

This was a point of confusion I had growing up. I have been described and have even described myself as not liking to talk. This clarification (in the quiz) of this generalization is kind of perfect. 

Prefer to not show my work until it's finished. That one stuck out big time! I have thought I was a perfectionist, but sometimes that doesn't fit. I can relate to this whether it was school work, an informal note, or even this blog.

I feel drained after being out, even if I've had fun. 

This one is one that stuck out. It was hard for me to accept or took a long time to understand. I always wanted to love parties and social gatherings as much as everyone else seemed to. And easy solution is to not participate, but that can be lonely. And then you think it's your fault you are lonely because you made the decision not to go. This conundrum isn't recognized all that much. You either like people or you don't. Be decisive! 

I am reminded of when I was a teenager and my poor mom flipped out when I said out loud that I hated people. I don't think I meant that exactly. I was probably just frustrated with this supposed dichotemy and feeling like I was living in a world made for someone else. Why don't I like to have fun (as everyone else defines it) and why does no one value what I'm good at? I was made to question a lot of good traits I had/have (not just the typical good girl, good listener stuff) and I imagine I didn't articulate it well. Ok. So it did sound pretty horrible. 

I don't enjoy multitasking. Now there's an understatement. I guess I didn't really think of that as a trait of introverts, either. That probably got me in trouble at work more than once. :) I wonder what would be my perfect career. This isn't the first time I've wondered this. I would say law because I could pay attention to details and would have the passion to be a voice for the voiceless since I could relate. Then there's the public arguments and all that... An introvert (former) lawyer is mentioned in the article as having a personality not fitting the career, but I think there were parts that fit quite well...

 I said I'd start with the quiz, but I probably hit on some points of the article that struck a cord with me, so I'll probably just end with it as well. They also talk about a study that more of less predicted the introverts out of a group of 5 month olds. Interesting stuff.

Just after it is an article by Dr. Oz that is not worth reading at all. Well, he does eventually make the point that you shouldn't force your kid to be what they aren't. That's a good point. I'll give him that.

But, he concedes that it's ok to be an introvert in some cases, but shyness ("genuine maladaptive shyness" as he calls it) is usually a sign of disease (not enough blood to the brain), autism, anxiety disorders, OCD, etc. It's possible that's not what he's saying, but in a one page article, at least half, maybe more, was talking about these cases and ways to medicate. From the title (Charms of the Quiet Child), I guess I assumed it would be a little more on the benefits of shy/introverted personalities than about when one should worry or seek medical intervention.

And he generalizes that it's easy to cheer for extroverted athletes, but the introverted math and science inclined should be equally cheered on. I think he's trying to make a good point, but ends up being too specific. Maybe he's talking about his own family, but it came off like painting with a broad brush, like he doesn't get it.

Nothing to Lose But Your Life: An 18 Hour Journey with Murad

Nothing to Lose But Your Life: An 18 Hour Journey with Murad
by Suad Amiry

I read Amiry's "Sharon and My Mother-in-law" first and loved the mix of explaining the Palestinian situation and humor and resilience. The first part of this one didn't hook me like that book, but the second part more than made up for it.

In chapter 10, she realizes they have been in the West Bank all this time (they are about to cross at The Wall) and the dangers, fear of arrest, running, bullets, hiding, etc happened on what is supposedly their own turf. Even for Amiry, who knows about things like this, the shock is palpable.

Chapters 11 and 12 struck me as out of place at first, but after some thought, they capture the situation perfectly. Chapter 11 is a fable or a few fables and 12 is about The Wall and a particular graffiti artist. I didn't realize at first that most of these images are actual Banksy "paintings" on the Wall; I only had seen a few in pictures. This chapter, like the art, is profound.

In chapter 14, this quote was great:

"I don't know what it is about Palestinians; they all believe they can pass for an Israeli, regardless of how typically Arab they look, the second they put on sunglasses."

It comes amid the various adjustments the workers are making to their appearance as they prepare to "blend" in with Jewish Israelis. I was aware of the plight of Palestinian workers, but not so much with this aspect. Very interesting.

Last sentence of chapter 14: 

"Only then did I realise that for me, and many others, Israel was virtual. For Murad, Israel was 'home.' Israel was a reality; a harsh reality."

At a cafe (deciding whether or not to continue), she defines the ultimate love-hate relationship, being out of ones' skin, out of place and history as being in her homeland Palestine.

Nearing the decision to quit the search for work for the day and distance themselves from the actual workers who they have slowed down some, they rest in a park and she tells a bit about what an Israeli park actually is- a peaceful green space that, by contrast, was taken by force from Arab villagers. For instance, most Palestinians are referring to Petah Tikvah as Mlabbis, it's original name.

This several pages long daydream about Mlabbis/ Petah Tikvah is brilliant. I wonder if she knew or researched the history, heard bits from Murad, or simply recounted the familiar 1948 Palestine or Nakba memory shared by many people and villages and retold by more.

In chapter 16, she talks about missing the Tel-Aviv (Lod) airport and the firman Sharon issued that no Palestinian from the West Bank or Gaza could use this airport. Also on this portion of the bus ride she remembers various Palestinian villages while looking for the rubble.

At the end, she takes off her worker's clothes and steps back into her life and reflects on the situation- real risks and dangers- that they face every day just to get a day's work. And the author's note! It is an article she reads the day she gets home about a worker getting shot doing what she just did.

Kayak.com second to explain ad pull on TLC show

 Before we get to Kayak, the Florida Family Association says 65-75 companies pulled the ads, but apparently this is a misrepresentation. Many placed the ads for a specific number of episodes and are distancing themselves from the bigotry of the current Lowe's /FFA/ All-American Muslim (and Kayak?) problem.

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/12/14/389225/fact-check-most-companies-not-caving-to-intolerance-will-continue-to-advertise-on-all-american-muslim/

***

Kayak.com has pulled ads for the same reason as Lowe's. There is an apology out there. I don't know if they are just backtracking or if they are sorry for the bigotry of the situation.

Initially Kayak said it pulled the ads because TLC was not up front about the nature of the show (which sounds like they could be headed in the same direction as the FFA complaint- how dare TLC air a show that shows Muslims as normal rather than the terrorists we know they are) but I guess it could mean anything.

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/travel-site-kayak-pulls-ads-tlcs-american-muslim/story?id=15159617#.Tuu10Dj0tko

Part of Kayak's initial statement using the "lighting rod" terminology like Lowe's:

"It's a worthy topic, but any reasonable person would know that this topic is a particular lightning rod," Birge says in the letter. "We believe TLC went out of their way to pick a fight on this, and they didn't let us know their intentions."

I would like to know more about the above before I decide whether the next statement about pulling the ads because it was simply a bad, poor quality, boring or whatever show is actually true. I tend to think "the show sucked" thing is a cop out and a good way to get out of this without looking as bad as Lowe's if they can get people to believe it.

Kayak does say it was disappointed in the vitriol of the ad pulling campaigners and said those opposing the ad pulling were more civil. I guess that's something. Maybe.

-----
Quote from this site:

“When TLC pitched All-American Muslim to advertisers, it was characterized as a fair-and-balanced look at the life of an American Muslim,” Birge says. “However, what was not disclosed was the preexisting controversy surrounding race, religion and specifically the divide between the Muslim and Christian communities in Dearborn, Mich. Dearborn has been a center of controversy for right or wrong; however, that was omitted by TLC when it pitched the show.”

Also on that site, it says Kayak's first blog post was about this issue (it is sorry to say) and that it has been interacting with critics on Twitter. Interesting...


The first sentence makes it seem like they were headed in the direction of the FFA - hey- this shows Muslims as "too normal."


The other part makes it seem like they just didn't know Dearborn had a large Arab and/ or Muslim population, uncharacteristic of the rest of the country- which is where charges of misrepresentation may occur. But if you want to see how Muslims are living here, it would make sense you'd go there. But as to them not realizing Dearborn was a center of controversy- that's ridiculous. Look at the heat Muslims have taken after 9/11. Any show about them is going to be (considered) controversial. They really should have known that, even if they didn't know much of anything about Dearborn.

-----

Their apology and current position is that they pulled it because it was not a good show, and are sorry it came across as bending to bigotry. Backtracking? Hmmm.

http://travel.usatoday.com/destinations/dispatches/post/2011/12/kayak-on-pulling-all-american-muslim-ads-we-handled-this-poorly/584847/1

 *** Lowe's-- additional info ***

 A good article on the Lowe's ad pull. Author says ad was pulled due to dozens, not hundreds or more emails, says company:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/story/2011-12-12/muslim-reality-show-american/51836318/1

Gingrich says Palestinians are an "invented people"

Perry stumbles and falls, Cain's past (and present) catches up to him, and now the man of the hour is spouting this garbage? It's inaccurate and if it were said about another people, anti-Semitism charges would abound...

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2011/12/newt-the-jews-and-an-invented-people.html

Lowe's letter- All American Muslim ads

My letter to Lowe's Home Improvement:

I, a formerly satisfied customer, am writing to inform you of my extreme displeasure in the recent events with which you have been involved: The so called Florida Family Association got you to pull ads from TLC's All-American Muslim, you made a statement admitting as much, then amid backlash you backtracked saying that you received emails from a broad spectrum of customers which actually only amounted to dozens rather than thousands or hundreds of thousands of letters.

The decision to pull the ads was not only hasty and premature, but also bigoted and cowardly. You obviously didn't investigate the claims of your dozens of Muslim hating customers because if you had, you would have found that TLC's show does not advocate one way or the other on any societal or political issues. All-American Muslim simply depicts the daily life of several members of a community many Americans know very little about. This show has much educational value and it naturally prompts discussion of important issues anyone encounters in life. This show is about life in America as much as any other show that you fund with your ads; I'm very confused as to how this one violates your ad guidelines.

I can only assume Lowe's has Muslim customers. I would have hoped, had you acted after some thought, that you would have been able to stand up for these customers who may or may not write to express their displeasure. Your actions rather said you would rather not be associated with one segment of the American population. Is that true? Do you only offer your products to certain people? I expected you to stand up for the fact that Muslim or Christian or anything else- we are all Americans instead of caving to a minority of bigots. I expected a large corporation like Lowe's to have a backbone and be able to stand up to a dozen emailers or even thousands on the very American value of all men being created equal.

Maybe I was wrong to expect your company to stand for what is right and American. Bigotry has won- unless you have a plan to turn this around.

Maybe it is not possible to buy back your ads for All-American Muslim, but what is needed is a massive sensitive, well-thought out apology and/or campaign to repair your image with those who are Muslim, those who are American and those whose intelligence you insulted by siding so quickly and decisively with those who want us to believe all Muslims are terrorists. I wouldn't know where to begin, so wish you much luck with that.

Or maybe your pulling of your ads from All-American Muslim have effectively highlighted the discrimination Muslims face in America and a boycott of your company will be a lesson in human rights and equality for many.

Peace to you,

NC based Lowes pulls funding from show All-American Muslim

Holiday wishes from Lowes!

So, I'm wondering, what do they have the problem with, Americans or Muslims?  ;)  

Did they buy into that idiotic email about Muslims not being "good Americans"? I (probably unreasonably) have had more faith in people than that recently.

The Florida Family Association will play a role, if you read anything about the controversy. A web search for their campaign/petition text yields a "404 Not Found" message, but this site quotes some of it as well as trying to link to it (full FFA letter)...

A one man show??

Whatever the reason- pretty trashy move, Lowes!

Let's go on and post this link to the petition to talk some sense into Lowes (and contacts for Lowe's and TLC):

• http://signon.org/sign/defend-our-american-values.fb1?source=s.fb&r_by=1781139
• And Lowe's Corporate webform (had to keep deleting, but I got in a few good paragraphs)... or this email execustservice@lowes.com
• And TLC viewer relations while we're at it (1500 character limit, I think)...

What do they have to say for themselves (not much- pretty weak, Lowes!):

The North Carolina-based Lowe's issued a statement apologizing for having "managed to make some people very unhappy."

"Individuals and groups have strong political and societal views on this topic, and this program became a lightning rod for many of those views," the statement said. "As a result we did pull our advertising on this program. We believe it is best to respectfully defer to communities, individuals and groups to discuss and consider such issues of importance."

Way to cave to a little pressure, Lowes! So much for socially responsible business. Like Caterpillar and the bulldozing of homes overseas. Wow. NC and Lowes aren't looking too good right about now. All those "Home of this and that" signs across the state might as well say bigot now. "Managed to make some people unhappy"??? I'd rather see "oops, that was racist/bigoted, we'll try and have more respect for fellow human beings in the future, we're sorry for reflecting poorly on NC and the US, guess what we're starting a Muslim scholarship fund (or at least reinstating ads)."

Really?!?! I mean if a bunch of bigoted white people emailed Lowes hate mail about black people, would Lowes fire all black employees? Or stop ads during shows with majority black casts? 

Or is it just Muslims that it's OK to discriminate against and or hate?

It's best to defer to bigots? When? On what planet? I mean, where do we live? What decade is this again? We never learn. Come on, Lowes!

On wikipedia:

A chain spokesperson said it was because of "...concerns, complaints or issues from multiple sides of the viewer spectrum", while also telling the association in an e-mail that it had "brought [the show] to our attention."

Multiple sides? Really? Spectrum? Would that be the Christians the hate Muslims, the Jews and hate Muslim and atheists who hate Muslims? We've got FFA and sites like this one (yikes). I'm afraid I can't fathom more than one side on this. I'd like to see some sort of graph or explanation of the spectrum.


Lowes on Twitter (for even less clarity):
Lowe’s values diversity of thought in everyone, including our employees and prospective customers.

We did not pull our ads based solely on the complaints or emails of any one group. It is never our intent to alienate anyone.

Really, Lowes? Because it looks like either your other comments are a lie or these tweets are a lie. I wonder which it is.

I wonder if Lowes has the same feeling about TLC's other shows- Extreme Couponing (I've got a disease similar to hoarding, but it's cool, I'm saving money), 19 Kids and Counting (trying to make a fringe extremist Christian group mainstream- if I were to make a complaint similar to the AAM haters'), Sister Wives (polygamy is illegal- Lowes wants to promote that but not Muslim Americans??). I really don't know if All-American Muslim is the only show Lowes has pulled it's ads from on TLC or on any other network, but I have to ask.

If you watch the show, you see that that could easily be a show about a bunch of Christian families- maybe different denominations or differing levels of "devoutness." They discuss Islam on the show (both in reality and discussion formats), so you don't have to hear about it from hateful people or evangelicals who know nothing about it. You also see that outside of the religion they also struggle with  exactly the same things everyone else does. 

And I suppose (with all 3 items) therein lies the danger- once you see others as human and there's no one to demonize, you have to look inward- and we can't have that, now, can we? Who knows what we would find.

Another issue- There are Lowes in or around Dearborn. What are they going to do??? Maybe Muslims shop there. (?!?!? The horror!) Are they going to ban Muslims from the stores to save their sorry image and make this evangelical group happy? Do they accept Muslims' money? Lowes needs to poop or get off the pot. Do you have a problem with Muslims or Americans or peace and understanding? Be consistent. If you get rid of the ads, get on with it, put the sign on your door. Take us back to the pre-civil rights era. Get it out there so we can have this thing struck down. Or you could admit you were wrong and headed in a very un-American direction and make amends yourself.

On a different note:  Previews after the 5th episode show what looks like Fouad, the football coach, the cast at a memorial service, with the eulogy including something like "when will the violence end." Yikes. Could be several events crammed together by TLC (like all networks like to do) to look exactly like something it isn't, but it looks serious. We'll see!

Also good points on:
http://thinkprogress.org/alyssa/2011/12/12/387101/lowes-all-american-muslim/

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/story/2011-12-12/muslim-reality-show-american/51836318/1

http://www.thetakeaway.org/2011/dec/12/lowes-pulls-ads-reality-show-all-american-muslim/


Not to get big brother on you, but my Feedjit tool tells what people search for and some crack me up:

muslims hate lowes
lowes says they hate muslims
what is going on between lowes and the muslims
lowes muslim problem

Israeli propaganda:
http://youtu.be/sVS92TXthg


Electronic Intifada's article on it:
http://electronicintifada.net/blog/ali-abunimah/israel-spurned-facebook-friend-worst-propaganda-video-ever#.TtyiUTj0tko

Thanksgiving... and other stuff

Nothing's ever simple, is it?

In my sorting out the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, I've at times thought about our own "origins" here in the US. We've got our own myths like Israel does. Cowboys and Indians. Thanksgiving decorations with the pilgrim, Indian, and turkey hanging out together, BFFs beside a cornucopia and a table full of food.

Shel Silverstein has a poem about looking at holidays from the food's point of view. It's kind of funny as is. But it made me uncomfortable a few months back as we read it as I thought about point of view in general. It doesn't help that I've been wondering how to explain some things to the kids- to tell the truth, but not to instill fear and hate (Thanksgiving and the Israeli occupation, for example). Back to POV- How the winner writes history in war. How the Palestinians in the current and historical conflict have the same problem even though we have the benefit of hindsight and the benefit of it's not being too late to right the wrongs. And Thanksgiving coming up. The kids are old enough to ask questions and notice certain things. One is in school and so she is learning the usual pilgrim myths from what I've gathered so far. Maybe genocide is too tough a topic for them yet, but maybe we can talk about some of the values they had and that these are often better than what the pilgrims brought (disease, superiority, crops that didn't work here, selling to replace giving, etc).

I don't know that I will boycott Thanksgiving, but I certainly want to be like some of the Native American groups who give thanks every day since this is also part of my own faith. I appreciate that this fact was brought up in worship just this morning. There is plenty that is good about it. It is pretty rare that Americans are encouraged to take days off (we like a disgruntled stressed out workforce here- it's great for the economy), so I'm all for anything like Thanksgiving where we can have a dependable widely recognized break. The time to get together with family is important, so I'd hate to see Thanksgiving done away with. On the other hand, I don't want to contribute to the preservation of the pilgrim (good) and Indian (bad) myths in any way. I feel that I should take a stand and bring up Native Americans and learn and ask questions, but most likely we'll focus on being thankful and avoid the pilgrims. I guess I don't have a solid plan on that one. We'll see.

 ***

I referred to this  above...

http://racerelations.about.com/od/historyofracerelations/a/ShouldYouCelebrateThanksgiving_2.htm

Some Native Americans have 13 celebrations of thanks a year and some don't celebrate Thanksgiving because they feel it is against their culture of being thankful every day.

***

I wish it were like this...

Among many of our peoples, showing that you can give without holding back is the way to earn respect.

from http://www.purewatergazette.net/nativeamericanthanksgiving.htm

 In my semi-disenchantment with our brand of capitalism, I have often wondered how or if something a little less synonymous with greed and more in line with the Bible could succeed. I listened to a bit on Quaker capitalism but we can also learn from Native Americans. The statement above is opposite of the atmosphere today. Today, it matters how much you have and can get; the method matters a lot less. If you're giving something away, you're seen as a sucker (your loss!) and definitely not respected more. If you're ripping people off, you are savvy, not a thief. Yes, there will always be bad apples, but these attitudes are the norm in society. For a country that prides itself on a Christian foundation and values, this capitalism thing sure is messed up. But for a country who wants to believe that Indians were dirty savages save a handful who helped out, converted to Puritanism and participated in harvest festivities while pilgrim diseases and guns (and subjugation) emptied the land for "discovery" and colonies I guess it's not much of a stretch.

I wonder if our myths aren't part of the reason we are so fond of Israel and theirs (Lucky us- a land without people for a people with no land! After the...er... massacres...).

Reading Lolita in Tehran

So I'm reading Reading Lolita in Tehran. It reminds me of separation of church and state rants I've done on the blog in some ways.

I had these thoughts while reading the first part of the book. She goes into some description of Iran and compares it with her life abroad. The recent republican debates, Eid stamp hysteria emails, sharia law hysteria, Muslim hearings in Congress, etc have also been in the background of my thoughts on church and state and extremes lately.

Voting according to religion is good, but legislating it is often not- be careful what you wish for- we may end up living up in a Christian version of Iran. Imagine if baptism was the law or baptized individuals received rights others didn't get. The state loses and religion loses. We need to vote our conscience; that is our right and duty. When we start to impose our (or certain) religious rules on others, it becomes a problem. Not only have we taken away their right to work things out for themselves, but it may very well backfire on us. We start with the good intention of shielding children and ourselves from immorality and then the balance of power shifts and suddenly others are telling us how to practice our religion and what's moral and who we can and cannot hire as a preacher (for example).

There is a bit of discussion on the veil in Iran in the book. Before the revolution when you could wear colors and read fiction and laugh in public, the veil was a symbol of a choice. When it became law, the power of the symbol was lost, though the intent of the law was no doubt a moral one. The veil changed from being a personal, religious symbol to one of oppression in a lot of ways.

Sorry- just getting a lot of hits on my Muslim stamp post and listening to the republican candidates and debate highlights (sharia law in the US?!) ...

And another thing occurred to me- about page 209. A thought about the Bush administration. Not to make a direct comparison between Bush and Iran or anything. (Seriously!) She spoke of a mood of resignation and tiredness with all of the bombings and interruptions of life (Iran-Iraq war) when they were forced to hear military marches, news of a "victory", or mourn a "martyr." And then she talks about the complete opposite attitudes of people in the street with anti-war sentiments and the government droning on- "the regime's ideal continued the play itself out undeterred." This sentence reminded me so much of the voices (many experts and former US officials) of doubt about Iraq's possession of WMD, yellowcake and Africa, link to 9/11, etc and the Bush administration's smug superiority when Bush, Cheney or the others would continue to repeat things (Bush doctrine, mushroom cloud, hit them there rather than here, Iraq has WMD, Iraq is linked to 9/11) with the same smug certainty when they were first only suspected as false (by liberals generally-and me, though I hadn't decided what I was at that point but plenty of people told me what I was...) as when they were increasingly known to all as false and maybe lies. I'm not calling Bush a dictator or anything, but there was that same distance so vast it was unbelievable and almost funny (tragic) between the public and the government in both cases. That sentence really struck me as extraordinarily applicable- especially Cheney's certainty and the way he quoted something picked up by the Times, leaked by the administration itself. Bush was always concerned about his legacy and history;  he can rest assured that he'll go down in it all right. Legendary.

Oddly enough , a recent event ties in somewhat. It's not the government, but still odd:

Did a Marriot Vacation Club survey and was asked a series of questions about vacations. Also included was a question about believing in 7 day creation and prayer in schools (?). We aren't members, but took a deal that offered a low rate in return to listening to the presentation and offer to do this timeshare thing, etc. I have no problem with discussing these things, but what is the motivation, here? It's none of their business. I am immediately suspicious and have less of a desire to join, not that it was high to begin with! This kind of gets at what I was saying- what if questions like these become routine for everything- businesses you want to enter and buy from, school admission, traffic stops.

ex-israeli president to serve 7 years

http://news.yahoo.com/ex-israeli-president-serve-7-years-rape-091342702.html

I guess it's good news. Everyone's saying how the legal system works or is improving and officials aren't above the law. There is a celebration of rights and freedom, but it begs the question for whom? We know there is a functional democracy for one segment of the population for whom the state and rights were designed- Jews.

And the judge quoted is Salim Joubran. I wonder if he felt the irony of talking about freedom or if he has access to the top tier of the legal system (he has pledged allegiance to the Jewish state?) and so he has no further obligation lest he lose his own station he's achieved.

Joubran seems to be all about Israeli democracy, but Daniel Pipes has branded him a destructive Arab nationalist. I don't know much about him, Pipes' accusations seem overblown and irrational, as usual. I'll try and find something better than Pipes- that's what came up first on Google.

Some links I plan to look up:

http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/70074

http://www.theisraelproject.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=hsJPK0PIJpH&b=5118555&ct=6957337

http://www.legalnews.com/ingham/948468

Irish and Canadian flotilla seizure, arrest, detention

November 8, 2011

An update on the newest flotilla. I had posted earlier about the attempt when a Democracy Now correspondent was being held captive.

 Here is the scoop:

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/11/8/israel_deports_democracy_now_correspondent_jihan

No violence of the Mavi Marmara type (thought someone almost got shot for telling the truth) , but still several interesting items to note:

• A guard told them: you are not an Israeli, you are in Israel, and we make the laws (asserting jurisdiction over international waters essentially). Maybe they were referring specifically to the special US Israeli relationship? See the next one.

• Another interesting fact is the US response to its citizens being held. The Irish delegation came every day and these prisoners had the right to associate in the courtyard, read and write. The US did not respond for several days and discouraged the prisoners from demanding the same rights as other prisoners because they were told this is a foreign country and the US is powerless here and it would be too much to ask as they are trying to work on their release. (???) Perhaps we should hand over our role as mediator in the conflict to the Irish and Canadian. The seem to have both the will and capability to secure rights for people and get things done.

• The detainees were pressured to sign a false confession much like in, say, Iran. They were in a supposed democracy, though. Go figure. They were told to sign that they had illegally entered Ashdod even though they were seized in international waters and pulled into Ashdod by Israel. Israel was not their destination. Gaza, which Israel likes to remind everyone they have disengaged from when it suits their purposes, was.

• Jihan Hafiz, an American citizen, was assigned the characterization activist rather than journalist simply because they didn't like her reporting. (How convenient for them!) She has DN credentials as well as US government issued credentials that allowed her into the House, Senate, State Department, etc. But what Israel says, goes, right?

• The official Israeli position is that it is a clear case of provocation and they have a right to defend their borders. The destination was Gaza. That is not Israel's border.

• Israel called the embargo the flotilla was supposedly violating an international embargo, not the Israeli embargo. Interesting. So, Israel is looking to the international community to uphold and take responsibility for this embargo and the lend it credibility and concurrently overlook illegal settlement building, apartheid, disproportionate use of force and human rights violations. (Well, it already overlooks it in practice, but Israel is always complaining when reports are issued about concern over these issues as though they are exempt.)

Palestinians Statehood Bid Friday- no consensus

http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/08/world/meast/united-nations-palestinians/

Wednesday and Friday are big deadlines this week. The 15 members have to look over the report and make changes by Wednesday and the admissions committee meets Friday (which is likely to send it to the Security Council for a vote).

What is up for debate: whether the Palestinians have a defined territory, are a peace-loving state, and are able and willing to fulfill the obligations in the U.N. Charter.

Let's take a look at this.

Well, on the first item, Palestinians' territory is as defined as Israel's, if you think about it. If Israel's a member in good standing, Palestine absolutely should be.

A peace-loving state. I know some people will be "up in arms" about that one. But given Israel's use of disproportionate force, collective punishment, and ethnic cleansing on a captive population, causing humanitarian crises, economic collapse, and massacres, Palestine is at least as peace-loving as Israel.

Willing and able to fulfill obligations. Here we might have a problem. Willing is not a problem. The Palestinian leadership has shown it's eagerness to "fulfill obligations" by offering to give up nearly the full menu of rights just for acceptance. Able. Let's see. Israel won't allow Palestinians a military for their own self defense and frequently targets the police force and infrastructure for raids and deadly/destructive attacks. Able could be an issue.

So, what we have found is that either Israel should be kicked out of the UN and international community (let's make this pariah state thing official) or we should fast track this ending the occupation thing that we've all been neglecting (no, not peace talks, I mean ending the occupation), allow refugees to go home (as directed in the UN resolution that is ignored), and pressure for equality for all citizens (maybe start with creating an Israeli nationality, rather than just Jewish?) and let Palestine and Israel (or Israel/Palestine as a single state) in after the occupation is ended.

A few more details here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20111108/un-un-palestinians-membership/