Tag Archives: face

After 6 Days, RNC Finally Removes Photo Calling Mixing Of Races A “Crime Against American Values”

Posted by Audiegrl

rncmiscegenationlargeMedia Matters/Chris Harris—After six days, the Republican National Committee finally removed a picture from its Facebook page that called the mixing of races a “crime against American values.” In 2004, the RNC demanded an apology from MoveOn.org after a supporter posted a video comparing President Bush to Hitler. Will the RNC live up to its own standards and apologize?

blank
More @ media matters logo

As the Raw Story article notes, members of the liberal news forum Democratic Underground launched a discussion about the photos on Sunday night. Another commenter saw the Obama photo had been on the RNC Facebook page since October 20. “So it has been up five days and not one person administering the site did anything about it. Apparently the site administrator finds this correctly sums up Republican philosophy.”

Other photos causing consternation included one of Mother Teresa, in which the revered religious activist was shown feeding a child. The caption underneath read, “Enabling scab-eating mouth breathers will do them no good. How do we expect them to take care of themselves?” That photo, also posted by Gee Dub, was also removed.

Yet another photo showed former presidential candidate John Kerry with what at first sight appears to be a rifle pointed at his head. The picture was framed in such a way that a gun several feet away from Kerry was made to look like it was aimed at his temple. That photo was removed as well.

Additional photos and more information @ The Raw Story

Related Articles

Will the RNC apologize for racist Facebook photo?

RNC keeps racist pics on Facebook for nearly a week

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics, Republicans

Fareed Zakaria: “We Must Stop Exaggerating the Iranian Threat”

Posted by Audiegrl

The Changing Face of Iran  (Photo: Paolo Pellegrin)

The Changing Face of Iran (Photo: Paolo Pellegrin)

Newsweek/Fareed Zakaria—It is time to clarify the debate over Iran and its nuclear program. It’s easy to criticize the current course adopted by the United States and its allies, to huff and puff about Iranian mendacity, to point out that Russia and China won’t agree to tougher measures against Tehran, and to detail the leaks in the sanctions already in place. But what, then, should the United States do? The critics are eager to denounce the administration from the sidelines for being weak but rarely detail what they would do to be “tough.” Would they attack Iran today? If not, then what should we do? It is time to put up or shut up on Iran.

There are three basic options that the United States and its allies have regarding Iran’s nuclear program. We can bomb Iran, engage it diplomatically, or contain and deter the threat it poses. Let me outline what each would entail and then explain why I favor containment and deterrence.

Fareed Zakaria

Fareed Zakaria

Iran’s nuclear ambitions are a problem. Nuclear proliferation in the Middle East is a danger, and the Iranian regime’s foreign policy—which has involved support for militias and terrorist groups—make it a destabilizing force in the region. The country has a right to civilian nuclear energy, as do all nations. But Tehran has signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, submitting itself to the jurisdiction of the International Atomic Energy Agency. The IAEA says Iran has exhibited a pattern of deception and non-cooperation involving its nuclear program for 20 years—including lying about its activities and concealing sites. In that context, it makes sense to be suspicious of Iran’s intentions and to ask that the IAEA routinely verify and inspect its facilities. Unless that can be achieved, Iran should pay the price for its actions. Washington’s current strategy is to muster international support to impose greater costs, while at the same time negotiating with Iran to find a solution that gives the world greater assurance that the Iranian program is purely civilian in nature.

It is an unsatisfying, frustrating approach. The Russians and Chinese want to trade with Iran and will not impose crippling sanctions. (Nor would India or Brazil, nor most other major developing countries.) Even if there were some resolution, it would depend on inspections in Iran, and the Iranians could probably hide things from the inspectors and cheat. They do occasionally make concessions, including significant ones last week—to open the newly revealed Qum facility to inspectors and to send uranium to Russia for enrichment (which Tehran announced just as columnists were declaring that negotiations were sure to lead to nothing). But there will be setbacks as well. The cat-and-mouse game will continue.

More @ header-newsweek-logo

Related Stories

Channel Surfing– C-Span: Scott Ritter on Iranian Nukes and the Middle East

Leave a comment

Filed under Culture, Democrats, Middle East, Military, Nuclear Weapons, Politics, Uncategorized, United Nations, War