Visa Application….Take Two

The trip to Iran is back on!

I am afraid of jinxing it, so I haven’t been too vocal about it and haven’t been getting my hopes up too much. However, if all goes as planned, I will be leaving with a group of Civilian Ambassadors on 26 November for Tehran. We’ll be in Iran for a bit over a week, returning to the US 7 December, in’shallah.

Since we were denied our visas for the August delegation, I am a bit concerned about the same thing happening again this time. The good news is that, this time, the fellow who was the reason behind our visas being denied last time isn’t applying. However, in filling out my own application, I had some angst when I had to check the box saying I’d applied for a visa before and was denied. Hopefully that won’t be held against me.

This delegation is a bit different that the August one, as is is to be led by a female Jewish Rabbi – this will be her second time leading a FOR delegation to Iran – and will include approximately 13 Jewish members, with the remaining folks being of Christian, Muslim, and other faiths. The focus of our time will be spent on interfaith dialogue, whereby we learn about each other’s faith and develop ways of mutual understanding and friendship. I am looking forward to learning not just from those Iranians with whom I will interact, but also from my fellow delegates, as we all bring such diverse backgrounds to the table.

So, the countdown is on….T minus 11 days and counting! I have everything that I had stored away from when I thought I was going in August, so I don’t have any “extras” I need to buy this go ’round…just pack the bag and go. Well, minus the overcoat I bought that will serve as my manteau – thanks to Ali I have the navy one now, not the white one with black circles….I’ll be much for inconspicuous this way!

Ahmadinejad Meets US Peace Movement

I am very upset that I was unable to attend this meeting, as I was invited and had accepted.  Due to the scheduling of unexpected oral surgery, I had to miss it…however, to my fellow civilian peace activists on behalf of Iran, I was there in spirit!  I commend everyone for their valiant efforts.  Posted below is one attendee’s reaction to the Fellowship of Reconciliation’s meeting with President Ahmadinejad last week….it was originally published on theNation.com. 

by Robert Dreyfuss

Yesterday evening, Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spent a couple of hours taking questions from representatives of the American peace movement. He appeared in a ballroom at New York’s Grand Hyatt hotel, at an event facilitated by the Fellowship of Reconciliation.

The questions to Ahmadinjead weren’t softballs: What about Iran’s crackdown on human rights and dissidents? Iranian policy toward Israel? Treatment of women? Iran’s foot-dragging on issuing visas even to peace movement representatives? And, of course, the big issues: What about a Grand Bargain with the United States? And will Iran accept a compromise on its nuclear fuel enrichment program?

The answers were, well, less illuminating than the questions.

In his preliminary speech, Ahmadinejad adopted the role of gentle, lecturing professor. Dressed in a gray jacket and off-white shirt with an open collar, wearing glasses and sporting his trademark, unshaven look, the Iranian president also drifted from professor-like to cleric-like.

The solution to the world’s problems, including war, is religion, he said. Sounding not unlike Rev. Pat Robertson, Ahmadinejad said: “When religious values are removed from society, there is no hindrance for war. We must promote morality, ethics, and religious values.” In case anyone was wondering what he meant by “religious values,” the fundamentalist Shia politician said explicitly that he is talking about a return to the prophets. “We have to go back to the methods of the divine prophets,” he declared, who were “sent by God to guide people.” He expressed regret that for the past several decades many people have implied that adherence to fundamentalist religious beliefs is “equivalent to backwardness.”

In response to the questions, Ahmadinejad happily endorsed America’s invasion of Iraq. “Finally, [US leaders] were able to make a good decision for once,” he said, referring to the 2003 war. But now, he said, America has overstayed its welcome, in an effort to dominate the Persian Gulf and secure access to oil. Having eliminated Iran’s enemy, Saddam Hussein, it’s time for the United States to get out. “We have friendly ties with both the government and the people of Iraq,” he declared. “The best help the United States can provide to people in the region is to withdraw troops from the region. Leave the region alone!”

Joe Volk of Friends Committee on National Legislation asked Ahmadinejad about the 2003 back-channel offer from then-President Khatami’s government to the United States to settle all outstanding issues in US-Iran relations in a Grand Bargain that would cover nukes, Israel, Iraq, terrorism, etc. In response, Ahmadinejad said that the main problem was that there was no response from the United States. “When the back channel became front channel, everything went awry,” he said. Rather than comment further on Khatami’s offer, he talked about his letter to George W. Bush, a rambling, religion-infused epistle that he called “an historical opportunity.” It wasn’t — but Khatami’s was. “There’s no need to go back channel,” said Ahmadinejad yesterday.

“We’re ready to have positive dialogue” with the United States, he said, suggesting indirectly that he’d be receptive to Barack Obama’s offer of diplomacy. But he seemed overconfident in regard to America’s military threat to Iran: “The American government is no longer able to start another war for decades to come. This is good news for the rest of the world, believe me!” True enough, America is overstretched in its two ongoing wars, but his belief that Iran is therefore safe from a US attack seemed dangerously misguided to me. During my visit to Iran in March, many Iranian officials seemed to underestimate the potential for the United States, with its $600 billion Pentagon budget and vast Persian Gulf firepower, to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Perhaps Ahmadinejad’s worst moments came in relation to human and women’s rights. Everything is fine, he said. Repression of dissidents and youth. “It is not the case in Iran,” he lied. “Young people are very active politically.” (Astonishingly, as evidence of young people’s involvement in politics, he cited the recruitment of Iranian young people to the paramilitary Basij militia. In 60,000 mosques acorss the country, he said, young men are attaching themselves to the Basij, which is an adjunct force to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. In all, ten million have signed up, he said, though most estimates say that the Basij is about one million strong.)

On women, the Iranian president waxed poetic about the precious beauty of women, in a rambling, stream-of-consciousness description of what he said is the growing role of women in society. It’s gone so far, he said, “To tell you the truth, women are about to replace myself.” (As unlikely as it is for a woman to become president of Iran, real power rests with the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and a woman cannot become an ayatollah or, therefore, the Supreme Leader.) “In Iran, the way women are looked at is different than here. They enjoy more respect at all levels, and they work less .. A lot of times, we don’t want women to do hard work. Cab drivers! I don’t really like it for women. It’s a tough job, really. … Women are the reflection of sublime beauty. Women are the reflection of all that is beautiful in society.”

He didn’t give any hint of a diplomatic opening on the nuclear issue. He ridiculed the United States, the UK, France and Canada for cooperating with the pre-1979 regime of the Shah on nuclear technology, and he got off a zinger: “When there were no elections in Iran, they wanted us to be a nuclear power. As soon as there were elections, they didn’t want us to be a nuclear power.” He specifically said that Iran is opposed to nuclear weapons, adding: “The time for nuclear weapons has come to an end. Those who want to build a new generation of nuclear bombs are politically backward, period!” Of course, the idea that Iran would risk world isolation, sanctions, UN Security Council actions, and the threat of war in order to have a peaceful nuclear energy program seems quite ludicrous to me. Clearly, Ahmadinejad is one of those “politically backward” ones. He refused to say that Iran would welcome a deal of the sort proposed by Thomas Pickering, for international guarantees for a nuclear enrichment program for Iran. Overall, no daylight there.

The “raging baby-making furnace” that is Palin

Seriously, I do not believe I could dislike Sarah Palin any more than I do if I tried.  She is the snarkiest, dumbist, and most full-of-shit politician I have seen/heard in a loooong time.  The lies she espouses are almost as unbelievable as her lack of international (and national) affairs. 

The sad fact is that many Americans have been too dumbed down to think for themselves.  The majority don’t do their own fact checking, choosing instead to ignore those silly “facts” and cheer for the person who looks/sounds/dresses like them – someone who reminds them of themselves.  Someone they’d like to “have a beer with” or “go shopping with.”  This isn’t a high school football game folks, nor is it a prom queen/king election.  I DO NOT want the person who I feel is prettiest or most likely to get laid on prom night.  No, I want the person, warts and all, who is best to lead the country – to pull us out of the finanical mess it seems we are in, who can restore the world’s faith (hell, my faith) in America, who doesn’t piss on diplomacy in favor of guns, war, and bombs (McCain’s famous chorus of “Bomb, bomb, bomb…bomb, bomb Iran” anyone?). 

Anyway, the purpose of this blog: Matt Taibii, Rolling Stones contributer, has published an article on Alternet.org that is very “on-target.”  Full of angst, fury, and his own brand of snarkiness….if it wern’t so frightening because of it’s basis in reality, it would be laugh-out-loud funny.

You absolutely must check it out for yourselves!

P.S.  More Iran information upcoming…I promise!

Mad Dog Palin

By Matt Taibbi, RollingStone.com.

I’m standing outside the XCEL ENERGY CENTER in St. Paul Minnesota Sarah Palin has just finished her speech to the Republican National Convention, accepting the party’s nomination for vice president. If I hadn’t quit my two-packs-a-day habit earlier this year, I’d be chain-smoking now. So the only thing left is to stand mute against the fit-for-a-cheap-dog-kennel crowd-control fencing you see everywhere at these idiotic conventions and gnaw on weird new feelings of shock and anarchist rage as one would a rawhide chew toy.

All around me, a million cops in their absurd post-9/11 space-combat get-ups stand guard as assholes in papier-mache puppet heads scramble around for one last moment of network face time before the coverage goes dark. Four-chinned delegates from places like Arkansas and Georgia are pouring joyously out the gates in search of bars where they can load up on Zombies and Scorpion Bowls and other “wild” drinks and extramaritally grope their turkey-necked female companions in bathroom stalls as part of the “unbelievable time” they will inevitably report to their pals back home. Only 21st-century Americans can pass through a metal detector six times in an hour and still think they’re at a party.

The defining moment for me came shortly after Palin and her family stepped down from the stage to uproarious applause, looking happy enough to throw a whole library full of books into a sewer. In the crush to exit the stadium, a middle-aged woman wearing a cowboy hat, a red-white-and-blue shirt and an obvious eye job gushed to a male colleague they were both wearing badges identifying them as members of the Colorado delegation at the Xcel gates.

“She totally reminds me of my cousin!” the delegate screeched. “She’s a real woman! The real thing!”

I stared at her open-mouthed. In that moment, the rank cynicism of the whole sorry deal was laid bare. Here’s the thing about Americans. You can send their kids off by the thousands to get their balls blown off in foreign lands for no reason at all, saddle them with billions in debt year after congressional year while they spend their winters cheerfully watching game shows and football, pull the rug out from under their mortgages, and leave them living off their credit cards and their Wal-Mart salaries while you move their jobs to China and Bangalore….

Read the rest of the article here.

Lipstick politics & Republican hypocrisy

At a 2008 Newsweek Forum on Women in Leadership, Republican VP nominee, Sarah Palin, addressed the “perceived sexism” that was espoused toward Hillary Clinton during her Democratic campaign.  According to Palin, it does women a “disservice” to bring up sexism in such situations, that women should just “expect” it and, in turn, “work harder” to “prove themselves,” to demonstrate that they can do the job.  She also stated that women should just “plow through it.”  Really? 

Seriously, how things change when the shoe is on the proverbial other foot, eh? 

When Obama made the “lipstick on a pig” comment this week (by the way…I referenced lipstick on a pig when discussing Palin in an earlier post – BEFORE Obama did) you’d think that he’d threatened her firstborn.  The McCain camp has responded crying “sexism,” arguing that the reference was made toward Palin and is derogatory.  Really? 

Pot, meet kettle. 

Why, all of a sudden, is McCain playing this card?  Why isn’t Palin just “plowing through it?”  Personally, I don’t care if the comment was directed toward Palin or not…I hope it was; however, Obama states it was not.  WHO CARES?  The Republican camp has been nailing Obama with labels such as a shadow terrorist, closet Muslim, and a whole slew of meant-to-be degrading descriptives; though, I still am curious why they feel being a Muslim, which Obama is not, should be a negative.  Unfortunately, in politics, this is part of the game.  No one called her an out-and-out slanderous name; I mean, it’s not like he came out called a spade a spade and said she’s a crazed, right-wing, evangelical, sarcastic, lying SOB.  Now, THAT, might have been actual NEWS.

Instead, Obama made a comment about how you can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig.  Well, if that is a sexist statement that hurt her sensitive feelings, then she only has herself to blame.  Why?  Because when she stated during her RNC speech that the only difference between a pit bull and hockey moms was lipstick (personally, I like Bill Maher’s answer better….the difference is you can neuter a pit bull), she pulled the first sexist punch. Follow the logic…she was talking about HOCKEY MOMS.  Therefore, hockey moms = pit bulls?  Granted, this is flawed logic, but so is equating lipstick on a pig to pig = women, specifically Palin.  So, I guess it’s okay to reference women to pit bulls, but not to pigs?  Hum…..seems someone is prejudiced against pigs to me.

In addition….as has been reported on CNN and other media outlets, this is NOT the first time Obama has used the phrase about lipstick on a pig.  In addition, McCain has also been caught using this same reference.  In fact, as Larry King pointed out tonight, McCain used it in reference to a Hillary Clinton proposal!  Again, pot meet kettle. 

If the Republicans are so outraged about sexism, where was the outrage during Hillary Clinton campaign?  Where were these Johhny Come Lately sexism criers when the “Hillary Clinton Nutcrackers” came on the market?  Where were they when the “Bros before Ho’s” tee-shirts were marketed?  Where were they when all the other comments regarding her femaleness, hairstyle, clothing, etc. were made?  I guess sexism just matters when it’s one of their Republican sisters who are being degraded.

Really people?  Is this what is most important during a political campaign that is to decide who is to run the greatest and most powerful country on Earth?  Is that what we have come to…debating lipstick and pigs rather than real issues, such as the environment, foreign policy, women’s rights, immigration, etc., etc.?  This is shameful.  Sad and shameful and I am embarrassed.

Shame on you John McCain and Sarah Palin.  Shame on you for being so clearly hypocritical.  Is your campaign so light on substance that you must attempt to focus on playground antics rather than real substance?  I can only hope that the American people can see through this ploy and see it for what it is: an attempt to create drama and divert American attention away from real issues.  Are they scared that if we took a look at real issues we would see that McCain is more of the same?  That he is an extension of the Bush presidency?  That he has had over 30 years of Washington politics and not too much to show for it? 

I also have a shame on you for Obama…shame on him for not lashing out, growing a pair, and standing up to McCain.  Put on your big-boy pants and FIGHT BACK.  Typically, two wrongs don’t make a right, but in politics it apparently does.  Fight back!  Stand up for yourself and those who believe in you!  If you don’t, McCain will win.  And that, my friends, is a scary, scary thought.

You can put lipstick on a pig….it’s still a pig

Although the true meaning of “jihad” is NOT war against a people, it seems to be the commonly interpreted meaning.  In fact, the below quote is one of a few meanings of the word “jihad” from www.thefreedictionary.com: 

ji·had also je·had (j-häd)

n.

1. A Muslim holy war

 

Again, this is NOT the true meaning of the word when you research the actual Arabic roots of the word, but it is in line with what most Westerners think when we hear the word.  We always think of the “crazy, Muslim jihadists” who wage war in the name of religion (in their case, Islam).

 

Well, keeping that definition in mind – perhaps omitting the word Muslim and considering jihad a religious war or God/Allah mandated war, I want you to consider the following quote by Republican Veep nominee, Sarah Palin, when she addressed graduating commission students at the Wasilla Assembly of God:

 

“Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending [U.S. soldiers] out on a task that is from God,” she exhorted the congregants. “That’s what we have to make sure that we’re praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God’s plan.”

 

Hum….the Iraq war is a “task of God”….the Iraq war is “God’s plan”….

 

I ask, who is the jihadist?

You’re not gonna highjack my feminism!

Written by Marc, a contributor to one of my favorite websites, www.feministing.com, this essay nicely articulates what I and many of my friends are feeling these days in the wake of the Sarah Palin VP nomination.  Ladies and Gentleman, Sarah Palin is NOT Hillary Clinton.  Palin would work to reverse much of the progress that Hillary Clinton, throughout her career, has worked to promote and achieve.  Like Marc states in his essay (see below), Palin is not going to finally shatter that glass ceiling that Hillary put so many cracks in; instead, she’s going to ensure, if she has her way, that it holds strong – perhaps my dad can loan her some duct tape to paste it together.  Sarah Palin is NOT anywhere near the level of Hillary Clinton when it comes to advocating for women, governmental experience, foreign relations, etc.  Shame on the Republicans for parading out Sarah Palin in such a blatant attempt of pandering….we women are not stupid.  We aren’t going to vote for someone who clearly doesn’t have our interests at heart just because she happens to have the same “private parts” as ourselves.

Marc’s wonderful blog:

McCain/Palin highjacks my feminism

I work for change. I work hard – 12-14 hours a day for change, both literally and otherwise. I do it for America. I do it for the single mothers who have no opportunities in life other than working two jobs while trying to meet ends meet. I do it for the guys in Iraq who are dodging bullets. I do it for those I went to school with, who have had to drop out because they could no longer afford college. I do it for women whose bodies are still being controlled by the likes of John McCain.

But since the Sarah Palin pick – I am also doing it for myself. I am pissed. I am beyond pissed. John McCain has not only shown his tokenism in the Sarah Palin pick, but he’s also shown he does not respect women. He thinks that women are simple creatures – awed at shiny things, and of course, will flock toward his campaign because Sarah Palin is a woman. The simple fact is that being a woman is simply not enough; being a woman does not mean one stands up for the rights of women; being a woman does not make one a feminist.

McCain simply does not get it. He does not get that respecting women as human beings means recognizing that, like all humans, women are all different. He does not understand that respecting women as human beings means trusting them enough to honor the personal choices they make in life. He does not understand that ownership of a vagina – just like ownership of a penis, is not good enough to be vice president.

For Palin’s part, she insults my feminism, too. Nevermind the 16-million cracks in the glass ceiling reference and that she’s going to break it for all women. No, if anything, Palin’s role, if she ever becomes vice president, will be to patch that glass ceiling. While Palin pats herself on the back for having had the opportunity to be in the political spotlight, she will also be denying other women those same rights and choices. Nevermind the fact that her running mate does not believe in equal pay for equal work.

Palin fancies herself a feminist and a champion of the pro-life movement. Her story of boring (and it is!) a child with a disability will be told and told again. I say the woman needs to check her privilege. Sure, she may have been able to make the choice because of her position as governor, but what about other women? What do they do? While Palin will bask herself in the spotlight, she’s denying others the opportunities to do the same. She is no feminist, and she’s high-jacking my movement. I’ll be damned if I ever let her do that again.

Then, I am also doing this for the men who were on the fence about this election, but now have chosen to support John McCain because he has a “hot” running mate. It’s nice to know that while women had easier access to the public spheres, they’re still being judged on their looks, and not their policies. It’ll be a rude awakening for these pigs the night of Nov. 4th, when they realize that their hot VP will be flying back to Alaska and living in an igloo somewhere.

Yeah – I work for change. I work for the American people. I work for a better America, and the long hours coupled with the little bit of pay has tired me. But damn it, I am going to bust my ass every day doing this because I am no longer just working for my America, I am working for my feminism. Don’t highjack my feminism.

Source

Republican Hypocrisy

Pot, meet Kettle….

 

“With all due respect again to Governor Kaine, he’s been a governor for three years, he’s been able but undistinguished. I don’t think people could really name a big, important thing that he’s done. He was mayor of the 105th largest city in America … It’s not a big town. So if he were to pick Governor Kaine, it would be an intensely political choice where he said, `You know what? I’m really not, first and foremost, concerned with, is this person capable of being president of the United States?”

 

Karl Rove, August 10 2008, on why Virginia Governor Tim Kaine would be a poor Democratic VP choice, without regard to the “responsibilities of president.”

 

SOURCE