NORTON META TAG

13 January 2012

Evangelical Leaders Struggle To Crown A Candidate 13JAN12

I look at the gop / tea-bagger candidates claiming to represent the morality of Christianity in their campaigns and all I can see is that Robert Mapplethorpe photo of the crucifix in a urinal and wonder why both Catholics and Protestants aren't outraged all over again. IF these evangelical leaders are looking for a candidate who represents the teaching of Jesus Christ they aren't going to find one among those running for the gop / tea-bagger nomination. All one has to do is go to PolitiFact.com or FactCheck.org and review all the lies, deceptions and manipulations to see there is nothing Christian about their political campaigns. Not one of them is running a campaign based on the truth, and if the candidate isn't lying then the super pacs supporting them are, with the candidates blessing. No, these evangelical leaders don't want a Christian candidate, they want a candidate that reflects their twisted me first, greed based, power hungry bastardization of Christianity. What a testimony!!! This from NPR......
Richard Land, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Committee of the Southern Baptist Convention, testifies before Congress on July 14, 2010. He thinks religious conservatives should try to rally behind a candidate other than Mitt Romney.
Enlarge Alex Brandon/AP Richard Land, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Committee of the Southern Baptist Convention, testifies before Congress on July 14, 2010. He thinks religious conservatives should try to rally behind a candidate other than Mitt Romney.

Rick Santorum was fresh off his surprise showing in the Iowa caucuses and fielding questions on a radio program, when a caller challenged the Republican presidential candidate on his overt religiosity.
"He said, 'We don't need a Jesus candidate. We need an economic candidate,' " Santorum recalled later, at a town hall meeting in New Hampshire. "And my answer to that was, 'We always need a Jesus candidate, right?' "
Santorum, the former Pennsylvania senator, and a Catholic, wants to claim that mantle. So does former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who's also a Catholic, and Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who's an evangelical. Yet none of them has won the hearts of conservative leaders.
"There is no perfect candidate," says Bryan Fischer, director of issue analysis at the American Family Association. "Jesus Christ is not on the ballot in any of the primary elections, so that means social conservatives have to do triage."
To perform the triage, more than 150 religious conservatives are gathering at a Texas ranch Friday and Saturday. Among the bigger names: Tony Perkins of Family Research Council; Gary Bauer, a former presidential candidate; James Dobson, who used to head Focus on the Family; and Don Wildmon, who once ran American Family Association.
Auditioning Anti-Romneys
The mission of this "emergency meeting" is to unite behind one true-blue religious conservative for the Republican nomination. Fischer says evangelicals are desperate to defeat President Obama. But he does not believe former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney — whom they distrust on issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage — can generate the passion to do that.
"If Romney gets the nomination, his support is going be tepid, lukewarm, maybe even nonexistent," Fischer says.
It probably won't be that bad, says Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention. Polls suggest that given the choice between Romney and President Obama in a general election contest, 9 out of 10 evangelicals would vote for Romney.
And yet, Land says: "Before we marry the guy next door, don't you think we ought to have a fling with a tall dark stranger and see if he can support us in the manner to which we'd like to be accustomed? And if he can't, we can always marry the steady beau who lives next door."
Learning From Past Mistakes
If evangelical leaders fail to unite behind what they see as a staunch religious conservative, Fischer says, they'll make the same "mistake" they made four years ago.
Before we marry the guy next door, don't you think we ought to have a fling with a tall dark stranger and see if he can support us in the manner to which we'd like to be accustomed?
"I do think some social conservative are doing some 20-20 hindsight analysis of what happened in 2008," he says. "Realizing they had a social conservative candidate to back in [former Arkansas Gov.] Mike Huckabee, they didn't coalesce around him, and that provided a path for [Arizona Sen.] John McCain — who was not a fighter on our issues — to win the nomination."
On Friday night, surrogates for each candidate will come before the crowd and make a case for their guy. Saturday morning, the group will discuss whom to crown.
Land notes that each of the serious contenders has flaws: Gingrich has his multiple marriages and ethical violations. Perry has his gaffes and his oops moment. Santorum has little money to run a national campaign.
Complicating the matter, Land says, is that many of the leaders are already backing a candidate. "And what they're saying: 'I think it's great. We need to be united behind a social conservative, but I can't really do that until my guy's out of the race.' "
Conservative Kingmakers?
Others say the Texas gathering may be less than meets the eye in another way: These so-called elites just don't wield the power they used to.
"Gone are the days of the kingmakers who can sit in a room and decide who the evangelical candidate is," says Robert P. Jones, who heads the Public Religion Research Institute. He says the organizations that so influenced Republican politics during the 1980s and 1990s now sit on the sidelines.
"Focus on the Family has laid off hundreds of people," Jones notes. "The Moral Majority is no more. The Christian Coalition is no more. So these groups that really were able to translate these decisions made in closed rooms by a group of men deciding who was going to be the next candidate really don't exist in the way they did."
Fischer may not buy that analysis, but he does think the Texas meeting will end in a draw.
"They're going to come away and say, 'Well, look, we're not going to be able to come together and unite behind one candidate. So this is an issue that voters in South Carolina [on Jan. 21] and Florida [on Jan. 31] are going to have to decide for us,' " he says.
And by then, it may be too late for anyone but Romney.
 


Is nothing sacred? PETITION TO STOP FORECLOSURE ON THE HIGHER GROUND EMPOWERMENT CENTER IN ATLANTA 13JAN12

THE greed of BBT is disgusting, but more than that it is sad. It is a sad commentary on the lack of morality guiding the financial institutions of this country. Please join Rebuild The Dream and click the header or link to sign the petition to BBT's CEO kelly king to stop the foreclosure on Higher Ground Empowerment Center and to work with the church to restructure their loan.
Rebuild the Dream

We’ve seen banks make some pretty audacious moves, but this one takes the cake.
Just days away from the MLK holiday, BB&T bank is attempting to foreclose on one of the oldest churches in Dr. King’s old neighborhood -- Vine City in Atlanta, Georgia.
The church, Higher Ground Empowerment Center, has been a cornerstone of one of Atlanta’s most historic and under-resourced communities for the past 108 years. After a tornado ripped through the property in 2008, the church was forced to take out a loan to cover the repairs. It has managed to pick itself up, rebuild, and continue servicing the community.
But now BB&T wants to foreclose, ignoring the church's attempts to work with the bank to modify the loan.
This church needs your help, so we've started an emergency petition.
Sign the petition and tell BB&T's CEO Kelly King to stop foreclosure on this historic pillar of the community.
BB&T took $3.1 billion in bailout money from the American people in 2008 and used it to eat up hundreds of smaller banks, acquiring another $26 billion in assets the following year.
Higher Ground Empowerment Center is not asking for a bailout. For four years, they’ve simply been asking BB&T to modify their loan to something more reasonable, based on the property's fair value. But the bank has refused.
Sadly, their situation is just like millions of other homes and properties with underwater mortgages -- banks just seem to lack all manners and decency, and often won't even return phone calls.
In this case, the reason is simple -- the church is sitting on a valuable piece of land and the bank stands to make a huge profit.
Since 2004, Vine City has been undergoing “urban renewal” efforts. Through this process, banks have foreclosed on business owners and residents in the short term, while profiting off of inflated property values in the long run.
If this church is foreclosed, it will have a domino effect on the rest of the community.
Occupy Atlanta has jumped in to support the Higher Ground Empowerment Center and the Vine City community. They've brought valuable attention to this situation, and the bank is showing that they're paying attention. Now is a critical moment to add momentum and show the bank that people across the country are watching. BB&T should be helping, not exploiting, the church and the Vine City community.
Click here to sign the petition and tell BB&T CEO Kelly King to negotiate fairly with the church.
Thank you for taking a stand,
Van, Natalie, Billy, Jim, Ian, Somer and the rest of the Rebuild the Dream team



Rebuild the Dream is an engine helping to drive the 21st-century movement to renew the American Dream. You can follow us on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.

12 January 2012

Dear Customer Who Stuck Up For His Little Brother 7JAN12

THIS story reminds me of when my nephew Kyle wanted a cabbage patch doll for Christmas one year and how my brother-in law had a hissy fit when my sister got him one. Kyle's interest in the doll lasted less than a year and then it was left behind with other toys he lost interest in, but it did no harm for him to have that doll and sleep with it and drag it around when he was interested in it. I am glad my sister stood up to Kyle's dad, and I am glad this young man stood up to his dad for his younger brother. Both young men are going to be just fine.......
You thought I didn't really notice. But I did. I wanted to high-five you.
Yesterday I had a pair of brothers in my store. One was maybe between 15 and 17. He was a wrestler at the local high school. Kind of tall, stocky and handsome. He had a younger brother, who was maybe about 10 to 12 years old. The only way to describe him was scrawny, neat, and very clean for a boy his age. They were talking about finding a game for the younger one, and he was absolutely insisting it be one with a female character. I don't know how many of y'all play games, but that isn't exactly easy. Eventually, I helped the brothers pick a game called "Mirror's Edge." The youngest was pretty excited about the game, and then he specifically asked me, "Do you have any girl color controllers?" I directed him to the only colored controllers we have, which include pink and purple ones. He grabbed the purple one, and informed me purple was his FAVORITE.
The boys had been taking awhile, so their father eventually came in. He saw the game, and the controller, and started in on the youngest about how he needs to pick something different. Something more manly. Something with guns and fighting, and certainly not a purple controller. He tried to convince him to get the new Zombie game "Dead Island" and the little boy just stood there repeating, "Dad, this is what I want, OK?" Eventually it turned into a full-blown argument complete with Dad threatening to whoop his son if he didn't choose different items.
That's when big brother stepped in. He said to his dad, "It's my money, it's my gift to him. If it's what he wants, I'm getting it for him, and if you're going to hit anyone for it, it's going to be me." Dad just gave his oldest son a strong stern stare-down, and then left the store. Little brother was crying quietly. I walked over and ruffled his hair (yes, this happened all in front of me). I said, "I'm a girl, and I like the color blue, and I like shooting games. There's nothing wrong with what you like. Even if it's different than what people think you should." I smiled, he smiled back (my heart melted!). Big brother then leaned down, kissed little brother on the head, and said, "Don't worry, dude."
They checked out and left, and all I can think is how awesome big brother is, how sweet little brother is, and how Dad ought to be ashamed for trying to make his son any other way.
This piece was originally published on Kristen's blog,

Dogs Saying Grace Before Meals

KALEIDOSCOPE

CHECK this out, I'd love to have a wall or ceiling like this!!!! I remember getting kaleidoscopes as a kid, a cardboard tube about a foot long, you turned the end and the design and colors changed...it was so simple, and so cool!!!!
http://inoyan.narod.ru/kaleidoskop.swf 

U.S. MARINES URINATING ON DEAD TALIBAN IN AFGHANISTAN 11JAN12

THIS is disgusting and these "marines" should be court martialed.

Marines to probe video of soldiers urinating on corpses

By Stephen C. Webster
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
 
Four unknown men in U.S. Marine Corps uniforms urinate on dead bodies, as shown in a video published anonymously online. Photo: Screencapture via YouTube.
Topics:
Military officials said Wednesday that they’re investigating a video published online showing four men in U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) uniforms urinating on several lifeless bodies purported to be dead Taliban fighters in Afghanistan.
“While we have not yet verified the origin or authenticity of this video, the actions portrayed are not consistent with our core values and are not indicative of the character of the Marines in our Corps,” a USMC spokeswoman told celebrity gossip website TMZ. ”This matter will be fully investigated and those responsible will be held accountable for their actions.”
The video was published by an unknown person with a caption that reads, “scout sniper team 4 with 3rd battalion 2nd marines out of camp lejeune peeing on dead talibans.”
The men pictured have not been positively identified and it was not clear when the video was shot.
An uncensored version of the footage was available via YouTube

Has Obama Waged A War On Religion? 8JAN12

SO many of these "religious" people have no problem spreading lies about the Obama administration one has to question just how religious they really are. Here is another example of the "religious" spreading lies about Pres Obama from NPR....

Some political and religious leaders say there is a White House-led war against religion.
Enlarge Joe Drivas/Getty Images Some political and religious leaders say there is a White House-led war against religion.
Americans' religious liberties are under attack — or at least that's what some conservatives say.
Newt Gingrich warns the U.S. is becoming a secular country, which would be a "nightmare." Rick Santorum says there's a clash between "man's laws and God's laws." And in a campaign ad, Rick Perry decried what he called "Obama's war on religion," saying there is "something wrong in this country when gays can serve openly in the military but our kids can't openly ... pray in school."
Of course, children can pray in school, but Perry is echoing a larger argument: that religious freedom is at risk. The story is much more complicated than either side makes out.
If you're looking for evidence that the Obama administration is hostile to faith, conservatives say, the new health care law is Exhibit A. The law requires employers to offer health care plans that cover contraceptives. Churches don't have to, but religiously affiliated charities, hospitals and colleges do. That doesn't sit well with the Catholic monks at Belmont Abbey College in North Carolina.
"When the government said to them, you're going to have to fund contraception, sterilization, in violation of your deeply held religious convictions, the monks at Belmont Abbey College knew that they just couldn't do that," says attorney Hannah Smith at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty.
The college sued in federal court last November.
"This is not just about health care," Smith says. "This is really about government coercion of religious individuals and institutions."
Religious conservatives see an escalating war with the Obama White House. One Catholic bishop called it "the most secularist administration in history." Another bishop says it is an "a-theocracy." Bishop William Lori of Bridgeport, Conn., who heads the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' new Ad Hoc Committee on Religious Liberty, believes the First Amendment is clear: The government cannot make people choose between obeying the law and following their faith.
I think [the Obama administration has] aggressively protected religious liberty in some issues and failed to protect it in other issues. But they're not hostile.
"If the government can force a church's hand and force it to violate its cherished beliefs," he asks, "then what's next?"
Because of that kind of force, Lori notes, Catholic Charities in Illinois shut down its adoption services rather than place children with same-sex couples, as the state required. The church also lost a federal contract to aid victims of human trafficking because the administration favored groups that provide contraceptive and abortion services. Lori admits no one has a right to federal money, but he says the government should accommodate religious beliefs.
"We don't have a constitutional right to a contract, but we do have a constitutional right not to be discriminated against because we're following our own convictions," he says.
"I am tired of hearing religious right organizations or the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church play the victim," says Rob Boston at Americans United for the Separation of Church and State.
"All we're really seeing right now is a very modest attempt from the Obama administration to put some controls on how some government money is spent when it flows to religious organizations," he says. "It's a very reasonable thing that quite frankly should have happened a long time ago."
Douglas Laycock, a constitutional lawyer who argues cases on behalf of religious groups, said he doesn't think the administration is hostile to religion. He says the administration takes the issues case by case.
"I think they've aggressively protected religious liberty in some issues and failed to protect it in other issues," Laycock says. "But they're not hostile. The hostility is in parts of the political culture — particularly in the gay rights movement and the pro-choice movement."
It's a larger culture war, he says — a fight that religious conservatives are worried about losing, particularly over gay rights. More and more people favor civil unions or marriage for gay couples, and more states are recognizing them.
This new reality troubles Mathew Staver, founder of the conservative law group, Liberty Counsel.
"I believe the greatest threat to religious liberty is the clash between religious liberty and LGBT rights," he says.
Staver says as rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people make gains, religious conservatives are having to set aside their convictions. A Christian counselor was penalized for refusing to advise gay couples. A court clerk in New York was told to issue same-sex marriage licenses, despite religious reservations. A wedding photographer was sued for refusing to shoot a same-sex wedding. Staver says these people aren't trying to impose their religious views on others.
"What people of faith don't want to do, however, is be forced to participate in something that literally cuts to the very core of their belief."
Boston says of course religious believers want to impose their views on the world — witness the fight against same-sex marriage. But he says under the law, people can't discriminate based on their religious beliefs, any more than a restaurant owner can cite the Bible in refusing to serve black customers. He says the solution is simple.
"If you don't want to serve the public, don't open a business saying you will serve the public."
What's happened in the past decade, Laycock says, is that the culture wars have become a zero sum game. When one side wins, the other loses.
"The conservative religious groups want to take away all the liberty of the pro-choice and gay-rights people, and the pro-choice and gay-rights people want to take away all the liberty of the conservative religious groups," he says. "Neither side seems interested in the American tradition of 'live and let live' and protect the liberty of both sides."
And Laycock sees little chance of a detente, particularly in an election year.

06 January 2012

How the Rich Get Richer 3JAN12

THE rich get richer and the rest of us struggle along trying to make ends meet.....so why are so many of the 99% supporting gop / tea-bagger candidates who want to keep the status quo? From Mother Jones...
While we're all waiting for the Iowa straw poll to finish up, here are some new income inequality charts for you to munch on. These come from a new CRS report, and the first one shows where most of us get our income. For 80% of us, the answer is: almost all of it comes from ordinary wages and salaries. We get a grand total of 0.7% of our income from dividends and capital gains.
For the top 0.1%, it's flipped around. They get less than 20% of their income from ordinary wages and more than half from dividends and capital gains. So when Republicans eagerly insist on reducing or eliminating taxes on dividends and capital gains, this chart shows you who benefits. Most of us get nada, but the very rich benefit handsomely.

Got that? Onward, then. This next chart comes from Jared Bernstein, based on the same CRS report, and it shows how various kinds of income contributed to growing income inequality between 1996 and 2006. Overall, America's Gini coefficient, which measures income inequality, increased by 0.057 points between 1996 and 2006. Of that increase, most comes from dividends and capital gains, which became a higher percentage of the pay of the rich, and taxes, which went down a lot for rich people.

There's more detail at the link, but you get the picture. For the rich, the amount of their income that comes from capital gains went up, while the taxes they paid on their capital gains went down. As a result, income inequality zoomed ever higher. Pretty sweet deal, no?

In Post-Gadhafi Libya, Islamists Start To Rise 3JAN12 & Strength of Egyptian Islamists proves a test for Obama’s pro-democracy policy in the Middle East 5JAN12

AMERICAN government officials and politicians are expressing their concern about the rising influence and political power of conservative Islamist political parties Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Yemen and possibly Syria. In reality their concern is not for the fate of democracy in these countries, nor for the human rights of their citizens, but for the state and profitability of American corporate interest and of the U.S. military-industrial complex, dependent on sales of tools of government repression and weapons of mass destruction to the region. Oil and war are the reasons for American concern, not freedom, democracy and human rights, and American support of the violent defeat of the revolution in Bahrain has shown these countries what the American governments interest really are.
One also has to compare the extreme right wing "religious" policies of some of the Islamist parties in these countries with the "religious" policies of some politicians in the U.S. Some of the gop / tea-baggers presidential candidates (ron paul) are supported by and adhere to the beliefs of the "christian" reconstructionist movement, which calls for the nation to be governed by strict "religious" laws that differ with the Islamic Salafist only in the name of their faith. The others (rick perry, newt gingrich, mitt romney, rick santorum) support and are supported by "religious" groups that limit the human rights of women and children and preach intolerance of other faiths, secularism and ethnic groups, the same as mainstream Islamist like the Muslim Brotherhood. Maybe we should be more concerned about the threat to our freedom, democracy and human rights from the extreme "religious" right here in America before worrying about "religious" extremist in the Arab world. Here are two interesting articles from NPR and the Washington Post....
A rebel fighter stands on a monument inside Moammar Gadhafi's main compound in Tripoli.
Enlarge Sergey Ponomarev/AP A rebel fighter stands on a monument inside Moammar Gadhafi's main compound in Tripoli.
One year ago, protesters across the Arab world began to rise up against autocratic rulers, forcing several from power. These revolutions have led to the region's biggest upheaval in decades. It's still not clear how these seismic changes will play out, and so far, the results have been mixed. In a six-part series, NPR is taking a look at where the region stands today. In the second installment, NPR's Lourdes Garcia-Navarro reports on how Islamists in Libya, long suppressed during Moammar Gadhafi's 42-year rule, are now able to operate freely.
Kolo Street in Tripoli is unpaved, potholed and lined with crumbling concrete and mud brick homes. The residents here complain of decades of neglect under Moammar Gadhafi.
But now, after Libya's revolution, there's a sudden interest in their plight, and it's not coming from the transitional government.
On a recent day, a man answered questions about his family's situation from members of an Islamic charity that just started operating in the neighborhood. The group is promising to help him and the six members of his family with food and financial support.

More In This Series

Part 1: Turning Elections Into Democracy
Today: Islamists On The Rise
Part 3: Syria — A Looming Civil War?
Part 4: Bahrain — An Uprising Suppressed
Part 5: Turkey's Expanding Role
Part 6: The U.S. And The Arab Spring
One of the men, Shukry Jualy, who started the Helping Hands charity, says he is a Salafi Muslim — part of an ultra-conservative movement that exists in a number of Muslim countries.
While Jualy says his group has no political affiliation, Salafist parties have done well in neighboring Egypt's elections. Much of their support came through grass-roots community work that translated into votes.
Unlike in Egypt, though, Islamists in Libya are starting almost from scratch. Gadhafi was much more aggressive in stamping out Islamist influences in Libya. For example, his security forces arrested anyone with a long beard, a sign of Muslim piety. And attending the early morning prayers at mosques, a timeless ritual in most every Muslim country, was actually forbidden in Gadhafi's Libya.
But now that the dictator is gone, Islamist groups are wasting no time as they try to spread their influence.
'Rehabilitation' In Misrata
The men in this makeshift prison in Misrata are from all over Libya, captured in various battles, all purported to be Gadhafi fighters. At prayer time, they line up in a covered courtyard, kneeling and pressing their heads to the floor.
One of the striking things is that all of the men have uncut beards.
A prison guard calls the prison a "rehabilitation center." He says the men are required to pray five times a day and they are taught Islam.
Guard Haitham Mohammed says when the prisoners arrive, they have no idea how to read the Quran or how to be properly observant Muslims. The guards then begin teaching them, he says.
But what they are being taught is the Salafist strain, which the men who run the prison follow.
The prisoners say they are obligated to pray and leave their beards uncut, and they're forbidden to smoke. Anyone caught breaking the strict code is whipped.
Fattah Abdulsalam Dares runs this facility. Like many things in Libya these days, his appointment was haphazard. He had no prison guard experience. He's a businessman who became a rebel fighter and then took over the prison.
Dares' story is similar to that of many Islamists in Libya. Charming and voluble, he recounts how he was arrested and tortured under Gadhafi in the very same building he oversees as a prison now. His crime, he says, was simply sporting a long beard. Now, he encourages all of the prisoners to wear one.
"We Islamists want to show people our real face, not the evil one painted on us by the former regime," Dares says. We believe in charity and honesty, he says.
Islamists Becoming More Prominent
The Islamist message has resonated across the region in the wake of the Arab Spring.
"There's no doubt that this is the moment for Islamist politics and Islamist movements," says Samer Shehata, an assistant professor of Arab politics at Georgetown University.
Michael Hanna, a fellow at The Century Foundation, a progressive, nonpartisan think tank, adds that the decades of repression have actually helped push Islamist groups toward their strong position now.
There's no doubt that this is the moment for Islamist politics and Islamist movements.
"This is a reckoning that was a long time in coming," Hanna says. "The postponement of the integration of political Islam into the political process, and the opening up of democratic potential probably exacerbated the current situation."
Still, it's something that makes many in the West uneasy. In the case of Libya, the fear is that NATO's intervention will clear the way for hard-line Islamists to take power, as happened in Afghanistan in the 1990s after the Soviets were driven out.
Already, many of the most powerful Islamists in Libya have a complicated relationship with Western nations. Britain and America often colluded with Gadhafi's regime against Islamist militants in the wake of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
Among the most infamous cases is that of Abdul Hakim Belhaj, who headed the now defunct Libyan Islamic Fighting Group. It was deemed a terrorist organization with links to al-Qaida, though Belhaj has denied belonging to Osama bin Laden's global terrorist group. Belhaj is now the powerful head of the Tripoli Military Council.
In an interview with NPR, he told of his rendition back to Libya from Malaysia in 2004.
Belhaj is now suing the British government for what he says is its complicity in his kidnap and torture at Gadhafi's hands. Documents recently discovered seem to support his claim that Britain's MI6 organized his transfer back to Tripoli.
Belhaj now has political aspirations, and he's been in talks with other prominent Islamists since last April. He plans to start a political party, but infighting has delayed a formal announcement.
Divisions Among Islamists
There are many different kinds of Islamists in Libya, and there are deep divisions among them. The Libyan Muslim Brotherhood, which was initially slated to join the group, has now backed out.
Libya's Islamists are worried about their reception in a country with no history of political parties for 42 years and relentless propaganda by the Gadhafi regime against them. So, they have been trying to attract other groups to what they are branding a nationalist party and calling the National Assembly.
The party's manifesto, though, was written by one of the leading Islamist figures in Libya, Sheik Ali Sallabi.
In an extensive interview with NPR, Sallabi said the new party will be inclusive and independent in nature. While Islam and Sharia law will be the basis for any Libyan constitution, he says, he looks to models like Malaysia and Turkey instead of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. He talks of a moderate Islam that is open to the outside and democratically minded.
It's a speech intended to ease concerns of critics in the West and in Libya. Recent polls show that while Libyans are pious and believe in Islam's role in society, they are extremely leery of Islamist parties.
"I think they are going to limit our freedom," says pharmacist Nouri Ghariyani. "Of course, we are Muslim but not Islamic. It is different; personally, I don't like them."
In many street interviews, people from all walks of life reiterated that fear.
And so Libya's Islamists are treading gingerly for now, waiting to see if, after 40 years under the shadow of a dictator, they can seize what seems to be their day.

More From This Series

 

05 January 2012

Bahrain: The Revolution That Wasn't 5JAN12

A LOT of us have been inspired by the Arab Spring of 2011. The bravery, the sacrifice of the people of Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Libya, Syria and Bahrain, some revolutions won, some still works in progress, and at least one brutally crushed, Bahrain's. All fueled by people's desire to be free, to have their human rights respected and protected, to be able to live without the threat of their own government being able to arrest, detain, torture and even kill them because of their ethnicity, religion, gender, occupation and politics. Now the American government expresses concern about possible Islamist governments coming to power in the Maghreb and what that means for American foreign policy and the human rights of the citizens of these nations. We need to get over ourselves, take the log out of our own eye before judging these nations. American approval of the brutal repression of the Bahraini revolution by the military forces of Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E. and our approval of the detention, torture, sham trials and even the deaths of members of the political opposition in Bahrain only strengthens the political fortunes of those who are justifiably wary of American approval and support. They have seen first hand that freedom and human rights are OK only if it benefits corporate America and our military-industrial complex. We allowed our corporate interest in Persian Gulf oil (of which very little is exported to the U.S.) and the profit margins of the U.S. military industrial complex (the U.S. Navy 5th fleet in Bahrain, military hardware sales to all in the region except Iran) determine that freedom and democracy and human rights are not necessary in Bahrain. This from NPR....
Bahrain is the one Arab country where the government has suppressed a major uprising. Here, protesters wave flags at the Pearl Roundabout in the capital Manama on Feb. 20, 2011, when the demonstrations were at their peak.
Enlarge John Moore/Getty Images Bahrain is the one Arab country where the government has suppressed a major uprising. Here, protesters wave flags at the Pearl Roundabout in the capital Manama on Feb. 20, 2011, when the demonstrations were at their peak.
Arab revolts against secular leaders have been much more successful over the past year than those against monarchs. The one monarchy that faced a serious threat was the tiny Persian Gulf island of Bahrain. But after weeks of protests, troops from Saudi Arabia rolled into the country, the Bahraini regime imposed martial law, and a government crackdown followed. Kelly McEvers made several trips to Bahrain this past year and filed this report as part of NPR's series looking at the Arab Spring and where it stands today.
Bahrain's uprising didn't get quite as much attention as some of the others in the Arab world last year. But it was one of the first, beginning on Feb. 14.
One man, who has been in and out of jail since then and could only talk to me while hunkered down in his car, was there.
"I remember the 14 February night — I cannot forget this night. Really I cannot forget," says the man, who asked not to be named. "Even my wife, she was telling me you'll be crazy. At the end, you will be crazy. Nothing will happen. A few people will protest and they will crush them and that's all."
No, he told his wife. This time it's different.
Bahrainis had protested before, mainly about the fact that the country's majority Shiites remain poor and disenfranchised by the Sunni monarchy. But they'd never protested like this.
At first the protesters asked for things like an elected Parliament, a new constitution. But then when demonstrators started getting killed, tens of thousands of Bahrainis converged on a place called the Pearl Roundabout to call for the fall of the ruling Al Khalifa family.
Bahrain State TV called protesters traitors and agents of Iran, which is nearby and also has a Shiite majority.
In Bahrain, pro-government thugs attacked protesters, and protesters fought back. Just one month into the uprising, Bahrain's ruling family authorized some 1,500 troops from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to enter the country.
Apache helicopters circled overhead as authorities cleared the Pearl Roundabout of all protesters. They never made it back.
An independent commission found that the Bahrain security forces used excessive force and tortured some of those detained. Here, family members look upon the body of protester Abdul Ridha Mohammed, who was shot in the head and died of his wounds on Feb. 21, 2011.
Enlarge John Moore/Getty Images An independent commission found that the Bahrain security forces used excessive force and tortured some of those detained. Here, family members look upon the body of protester Abdul Ridha Mohammed, who was shot in the head and died of his wounds on Feb. 21, 2011.
An Uprising Supressed
And so Bahrain became the one Arab country whose uprising was definitively put down. One reason, argues Toby Jones, a professor of Middle East history at Rutgers University, is that the United States and its allies wanted it that way.
For all America's talk during the Arab Spring about supporting those who seek freedom, Jones says, Bahrain was different.
"If there is a place globally where there is not just distance but a huge gap between American interests and American values, it's in the Persian Gulf," Jones says. "And its epicenter is in Bahrain. Bahrain is ground zero for the Arab Spring in the Persian Gulf. And the United States has chosen sides. It has decided that it wants to see the Bahraini regime survive and endure. And that's important not only for the American relationship with Bahrain but for Saudi Arabia."
The U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet is based in Bahrain, giving the U.S. a major presence that has only increased in significance following the U.S. withdrawal of forces from Iraq.
In addition, Saudi Arabia didn't want protests in its own backyard, Jones says. And it didn't want a Shiite-led uprising to encourage its archrival, Shiite-dominated Iran.
Bahrain's uprising was suppressed in a harsh crackdown. Thousands of people were rounded up, detained, and sometimes tortured. Two of those detained were elected members of Parliament. Others were doctors who treated protesters, journalists who wrote about them, and lawyers who defended them. Several people died while in custody.
Bahrain largely silenced the uprising, but not entirely. Sporadic protests continued and human-rights groups condemned the government actions.
After The Revolt, An Investigation
Eventually, King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa commissioned a group of international jurists to investigate. The commission recently issued its findings at one of the king's palaces.

More In This Series

Part 1: Turning Elections Into Democracy
Part 2: Islamists On The Rise
Part 3: Syria — A Looming Civil War?
Today: Bahrain — An Uprising Suppressed
Part 5: Turkey's Expanding Role
Part 6: The U.S. And The Arab Spring
Nigel Rodley, a human-rights lawyer who served on the commission, says the group didn't have enough time to discover who ordered the crackdown. But it was clear the army, police and intelligence services were all using the same sinister tactics.
"They were all using the same methods of apprehension, detention, ill treatment, and so on, which suggested a policy across different branches of government," he said.
For a moment, activists in Bahrain thought these findings might help revive their revolution. But while committees and commissions have been formed to implement some of the report's recommendations, no single high-ranking official has been held accountable for the deaths and the torture.
Back during the protests, Sadiq Abdullah, a doctor, was interviewed by Al-Jazeera about protesters who had been shot by security forces.
He eventually was called in for questioning by the intelligence service. Three months later and 40 pounds lighter, the doctor was released, but he still faces charges.
He and his wife, Nidhal, recently took me to their private clinic, in a building that houses a dozen or so other clinics.
"Everyone in this building was in jail," Nidhal said.
Sadiq used to be the only doctor in Bahrain who could do kidney transplants. Now he has been fired from his position at the government hospital. One of his students does the transplants.
"They've done two cases in the last eight months," Sadiq said.
And there are 98 people on the waiting list. Sadiq is furious at a government that would deprive its people of such care. Still, he has a lot to lose here in Bahrain. At the clinic he can earn in one day what he made in a month at the government hospital.
The United States has chosen sides. It has decided that it wants to see the Bahraini regime survive and endure. And that's important not only for the American relationship with Bahrain but for Saudi Arabia.
In fact, Sadiq and Nidhal are talking about expanding.
"We have to think of other options," Sadiq said, noting that it could include performing private kidney transplants
This is another way Bahrain differs from the other Arab uprisings. In Bahrain, the wall of fear hasn't been broken. People realize they have a lot to lose.
Now the only form of public gatherings allowed in Bahrain is a funeral — like a recent procession for a man who witnesses say was killed when riot police smashed into his car.
As the man was buried, people started chanting slogans against the regime. The riot police approached. A few young protesters threw rocks. The police responded with rubber bullets, sound grenades and tear gas.
That's all that was left of Bahrain's uprising.
The monument at the Pearl Roundabout has been demolished. All roads to it are blocked by armored vehicles. Protests are stopped before they make it out of the villages.
This is what's happening in villages all over Bahrain. But each one is contained and individual.
There's no large movement as was the case back in February and March. And from what a lot of people say, there's not going to be one anytime soon.
The riot police eventually fell back, protesters went back into their houses, and the village started to put itself back together.
For now, the uprising appears to be over. As the sun goes down, it's time for evening prayer. There is garbage on the streets, but somebody will come and clean it up. And then, life will get back to normal. Just like nothing ever happened.
   
After a crackdown, the government has promised reforms. But so far, little has changed.

The Arab Spring: One Year Later

Bahrain: The Revolution That Wasn't

After a crackdown, the government has promised reforms. But so far, little has changed.
Upheavals in Syria and elsewhere in the Middle East have left minorities feeling vulnerable.

The Arab Spring: One Year Later

Syrian Uprising Raises The Specter Of Sectarian War

Upheavals in Syria and elsewhere in the Middle East have left minorities feeling vulnerable.
Moammar Gadhafi long suppressed Islamists; with his death, Islamists are now starting to organize.

The Arab Spring: One Year Later

In Post-Gadhafi Libya, Islamists Start To Rise

Moammar Gadhafi long suppressed Islamists; with his death, Islamists are now starting to organize