[mpen-dayton4] FW: "GDCC Interfaith Prayer Breakfast" & "WE WON, WE WON, WE WON (please read)" & "We've got a question for CNN" and more
P.S. Please reply back to me with 'unsubscribe' added on the subject line if you no longer want to receive
my e-Newsletters. The convenient link to unsubscribe is no longer available due to security reasons.
P.P.S. "He who dares not offend cannot be honest" - Thomas Paine
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
· (Sept. 18) FW: GDCC Interfaith Prayer Breakfast
· (Sept. 20) FW: Invitation to Interfaith Forum of Greater Dayton Presentations
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
· FW: NYTimes: U.S. Drops Charges That Professor Shared Technology With China
· FW: WE WON, WE WON, WE WON, WE WON, WE WON! (please read)
· FW: Wooooooooo!!!!!
· FW: NO shutdowns. NO cuts to Planned Parenthood or vital programs.
· FW: We've got a question for CNN
· FW: FAIR: 'This Deal Affirms the Peaceful Nature of the Iranian Nuclear Program'
· FW: Responding to your message
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Crystal Walker
Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 3:42 PM
Subject: GDCC Interfaith Prayer Breakfast
Good afternoon, it is time to reserve your tickets for the September 18, 2015 Interfaith Prayer Breakfast, 7:30am at Summit Christian Church, 4021 Denlinger Road, Dayton, Ohio 45426. Please contact me by phone or email. Phone 937-789-9822 email: drcrystal1@yahoo.com
Tickets are $15.00 in advance or $20.00 at the door.
From: Katherine Cooper
Subject: Invitation to Interfaith Forum of Greater Dayton Presentations - please share with friends, colleagues, and your house of worship
The interfaith Forum of Greater Dayton would like to invite you to attend the presentation titled: Forum On Prayers for Peace in a Violent World
Date: 20 September 2015
Time: 3 – 5 pm
Location: Christ United Methodist Church 3440 Shroyer Rd. Kettering, OH
Dayton, Ohio 45429 (Map)
Foster Hall (3rd floor - there is an elevator)
Dr. Malarkey, Chair of the Humanities and General Education Program at Antioch University Midwest, and Rev. Dr. Rod Kennedy, lead pastor of First Baptist Church in downtown Dayton will speak to the need for and power of prayer when it comes to our efforts to overcome a world of violence. This call to come together in peace is in support of the United Nations Peace Day on Sept 21 and of the week long celebration of Dayton: "City of Peace".
If you would like to bring food to share, please do not bring any pork or shellfish products. It is a kindness to have a sheet with ingredients to alert other participants to potential allergens.
Mark your calendars now to attend our fall programs: more information to be announced.
25 October 2015: What is prayer and how effective is it?
15 November 2015: Prayers from your faith tradition
10 December 2015: Interfaith Forum of Greater Dayton Social
From: Jim
Subject: NYTimes: U.S. Drops Charges That Professor Shared Technology With China
All charges against the Temple University professor were dropped after it became apparent the Justice Department had misinterpreted a key piece of evidence. And as you will see, a key part of the story is federal law enforcement targeting persons of Chinese ancestry in the hunt for industrial spies.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/12/us/politics/us-drops-charges-that-professor-shared-technology-with-china.html?smprod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share
From: Chris Bowers; Executive Campaign Director, Daily Kos
Subject: FW: WE WON, WE WON, WE WON, WE WON, WE WON! (please read)
Last night, all 42 Democratic and Independent senators in favor of President Obama's diplomatic agreement with Iran filibustered a Republican attempt to undo the deal.
We have won. Peace has been given a chance. The diplomatic agreement with Iran and world powers is now safe, at least until next year's presidential election.
It is fitting that I am able to write this email to you on September 11. As a colleague of mine said on Facebook today, for the first time since 2001, "this country has appropriately memorialized those that died by choosing the road to peace instead of the path to war."
The war in Iraq left hundreds of thousands dead, forced millions from their homes, led to the horrifying rise of ISIS, and cost trillions of dollars. Thankfully, we have chosen a different path today. Next year, in the presidential election, we must defend that path.
Don't ever let anyone tell you elections and activism don't matter. This never would have happened without a Democrat in the White House. Further, the 263,464 members of the Daily Kos community--including you, Munsup Seoh--who took more than one million actions--petitions signed, rallies attended, emails and phone calls to Congress--played a crucial role in giving peace a chance.
Our allies at CREDO action have a great article up at Daily Kos about how we won this fight. It's called Peace Wins, and you can click here to read it.
On a personal note, in the months after the attacks of 9/11, as I recoiled in horror at the country's march to war, I changed careers from teaching and academia to politics and grassroots organizing. From 2002 to 2003, the netroots community that I call home emerged as a new, large, bootstrapped political force in American politics because we opposed war in Iraq when few others would.
To be able to write to you today in my capacity as the Executive Campaign Director at Daily Kos that we have succeeded in preventing war with Iran (at least for now), leaves me feeling deeply emotional and grateful to both the Daily Kos community and the wider netroots community.
At Daily Kos, we can achieve great victories with your help--filibuster reform, net neutrality, and now peace with Iran. Can you chip in $3 to help Daily Kos make more victories like this happen?
From: Ben Wikler, MoveOn.org Political Action
Subject: Wooooooooo!!!!!
At 3:48 p.m. on Friday, September 10, sitting in the third row of the gallery overlooking the U.S. Senate floor, I watched 42 lawmakers—almost every Democrat and independent in the Senate—walk up to the podium, thrust out a thumbs-down to vote "no"—and take our country off the path to war.
There's no cheering allowed in the Senate. So I had to hold it in.
But now I can finally let it out: WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!
Today, we did it. The other side had tens of millions of dollars. Our side had millions of people. The other side had TV ads. We had facts. The other side had fear. We had courage.
Sure, the Republicans will keep trying to undercut the Iran deal, just like they voted 60 times to repeal Obamacare. But today, with this vote, we made crystal clear that they're going to lose—and the defenders of diplomacy and security are going to win. Because of that, America is stronger, and the world is a safer place.
To be honest, I'm still pinching myself. Did this really happen?
Not long ago, it seemed like a very long shot that the Iran deal would survive. Republicans would be united, the prediction went, and Democrats would be divided. The bill to torpedo the deal would sail through the House, through the Senate—and then, President Obama's veto would be overridden by supermajorities in both houses.
But then the wind changed.
Through July, through August, we organized. Tens of thousands of MoveOn members and our friends made phone calls, visited their members of Congress, and spoke up at town halls. We signed petitions, chipped in for billboards and field organizers, and organized vigils—including more than 200 events just tonight.1
Republicans had hoped that this summer would be like the summer of 2009, when rampaging Tea Partiers terrified Democrats and emboldened the most extreme Republicans. Instead, voices of reason and peace and diplomacy rose above the shouts on the other side.
And one after another, instead of rushing in fear to oppose the Iran deal, Democrats in Congress actually took the time to read it, to ask questions, to listen to scientists and veterans and faith leaders, to constituents, and to their consciences. Israeli security experts explained why they supported the deal. Ambassadors from allied countries made their case. Democratic leaders in both houses—including Senators Durbin, Reid, and Murphy, and Representatives Pelosi, Schakowsky, Lee, Doggett, Price, and so many others—reminded their colleagues that this was one of the most important votes of their careers, and not one to be taken lightly.
And in the last two weeks, right up to the last moment, the trickle of support for the deal became a flood. We won the cloture vote in the Senate today.2 And enough Democrats have announced their support for the deal to sustain a veto in the House. Republicans may try more shenanigans—we'll have to be vigilant—but there's no going back.
* * *
Today was a breakthrough. But it wasn't just two months in the making—it took us more than a decade of work. MoveOn members have tirelessly organized alongside allies like J Street, Win Without War, CREDO, the National Iranian American Council, Democracy for America, the Friends Committee on National Legislation, Daily Kos, Peace Action, the Council for a Livable World, and many more.
Yesterday, I visited undecided Democrats in Congress with a group of people who knew the price we paid for getting this wrong before. Retired generals, combat veterans—and a Gold Star mom, whose son had died in Iraq on Memorial Day. Please, they all said: Give diplomacy a chance. At last, their voices have been heard.
In the twelve years since we went to war in Iraq, we've elected a president, sent progressive champions to Congress, and changed the politics of war and peace.
None of this was easy. But as hard as it's been, it's hard to imagine anything more worthwhile.
Thanks for all you do.
–Ben, Jo, Justin K., Alejandro, and the rest of the team
P.S. Since the run-up to the Iraq War, we've never stopped working for peace—and we won't stop now. Our monthly donors give us the consistent funding we need to win enormous victories like this one. Will you become a monthly donor today?
Because you've saved your payment information with MoveOn, your monthly donation will go straight through.
Express Donate: $5 monthly
Express Donate: $15 monthly
Express Donate: $50 monthly
Donate another amount monthly
Or make a one-time gift
Sources:
1. "Massive August Grassroots Mobilization to Support Iran Deal," MoveOn.org, September 4, 2015
http://www.moveon.org/r/?r=306948&id=131977-1195276-FYmtuMx&t=1
2. "Senate rejects attempt to derail Iran deal in victory for Obama," The Washington Post, September 10, 2015
http://www.moveon.org/r/?r=307085&id=131977-1195276-FYmtuMx&t=2
Want to support our work? MoveOn member contributions have powered our work together for more than 17 years. Hundreds of thousands of people chip in each year—which is why we're able to be fiercely independent, answering to no individual, corporation, politician, or political party. You can become a monthly donor by clicking here, or chip in a one-time gift here.
From: Ben Betz; Online Engagement Director, People For the American Way
Subject: NO shutdowns. NO cuts to Planned Parenthood or vital programs.
The enemies of choice and women's health are coming after Planned Parenthood with a vengeance -- using a deceptive smear campaign to try to defund the lifesaving national health care provider.
Some extremist U.S. senators are threatening to shut down the government this month over their crusade to destroy Planned Parenthood.
Any cuts to Planned Parenthood are unacceptable. Threatening a government shutdown is also unacceptable. Using the threat of a shutdown to force lawmakers to eliminate funding for Planned Parenthood is abhorrent, and our allies in Congress must not make any concessions.
The extremism of Republicans' attacks on Planned Parenthood and women is overshadowing any shred of common sense or decency among the anti-choice Right.
The economic damage last time Republicans shut down the government, just a few short years ago, was severe. It cost our economy nearly an estimated $24 billion, our credit rating was weakened, and, most importantly, real people suffered.
It's not that extreme anti-choice Republicans don't remember. It's that they don't care. They'll just do anything to feed their radical right-wing base, which is why even though Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell promised no more shutdowns, the threat of a shutdown is getting more likely by the day. With presidential campaign season already well underway, Tea Party champions like Ted Cruz are leading the charge for a shutdown with growing fervor.
PETITION TO CONGRESS: |
Thanks for stepping up to prevent another disaster, both for women and for the economy.
From: Represent.Us
Subject: We've got a question for CNN
From: Judy Burnette
Subject: FW: FAIR: 'This Deal Affirms the Peaceful Nature of the Iranian Nuclear Program'
'This Deal Affirms the Peaceful
Nature of the Iranian Nuclear Program'
Janine Jackson interviewed Nima Shirazi on recent coverage of the Iran deal for the September 4 CounterSpin. This is a lightly edited transcript.
Janine Jackson: A recent story in Politico reported that the pending pact with Iran over its nuclear program was figuring into Senate electoral campaigns as "Republicans are attacking Democrats backing the deal as soft on national defense." Two days earlier, a Politico story explained, as the headline says, "The Ultimate Argument in Favor of the Iran Deal: The Agreement Would Make It Easier to Bomb Iran," noting that this is a selling point offered by White House officials.
The two pieces aren't at essential odds: Both assume Iran to be bellicose and threatening, and consider the main criterion for any deal to be how bellicose and threatening it allows the US to be. That's been the climate of much of the conversation on Iran, conversation also marked by serious misinformation on a factual level. Now it looks as though Republicans don't have the votes to kill the pact itself, but there's little chance that the misinformation will disappear on that account.
Joining us to discuss Iran and the media is Nima Shirazi; he writes the political blog Wide Asleep in America and co-edits Iran, Iraq and Turkey pages for the online magazine Muftah. He joins us now by phone. Welcome back to CounterSpin, Nima Shirazi.
Nima Shirazi: Thanks so much for having me.
JJ: Even if both proponents and opponents of the pack based their arguments on the idea that Iran is developing, or wants to develop nuclear weapons, despite the absence of evidence for that and Iran's repeated denials, can we see the deal's passage as suggesting, anyway, that there is some response the US can have toward a country it perceives and portrays as an enemy other than dropping bombs on it? I know that's a low bar, but here we are.
NS: Yes indeed, that is a very low bar. I do think that the deal itself is a very positive thing. As you mentioned, of course, the rhetoric has not yet changed: the concept that Iran is hellbent on building a nuclear weapon, which has been disproven time and again, the concept that Iran is a perennial cheater and that all it's doing is now biding its time for another two and a half decades before it finally races towards a nuclear bomb–which it says is completely strategically, morally, ethically and politically unviable.
I think that we are still seeing so much of the propaganda, which has permeated this discussion for so long, still taking hold. Some of it is divided kind of bipartisanly right now, with deal opponents insisting that Iran will get this massive windfall of money as a signing bonus, even though it's actually Iran's money that has effectively been held in escrow, or that Iran will be able to inspect itself, which is absurd, or that there will be a 24-day waiting period mandatory before any inspectors visit any nuclear sites. All of these are completely bogus.
JJ: Yes, when something like a New York Times editorial says in favor of the pact–they said, if negotiations fail, "Iran is likely to embark on an even more aggressive search for a nuclear weapon." It's like a mobius strip of misinformation there: You can't have a more aggressive searching when there is no evidence of any searching, and then how is the absence of a deal going to force Iran to do the thing that it is not doing and has said it doesn't want to do?
Well, talking about the current situation where we're reading that the deal is veto proof, media are now talking about how it can be improved. Already I see John Kerry out there saying, "Don't worry, we're going to do this, but we will also give Israel more missiles." Again, it's seeming like maybe it's not exactly peace that's being argued for here.
NS: No, its kind of interesting, proponents of the deal have used that Obama and Kerry quote basically that don't worry, the deal makes the world and Israel safer, and yet were still going to give Israel these other weapons, just in case. It kind of undermines their concept about how safe the deal makes Israel, but behind all of that is that Iran is actually no threat to Israel. Israel, which has an arsenal of hundreds of nuclear weapons, and constantly threatens to bomb Iran, is actually much more of an existential threat to Iran that Iran could ever pose to Israel.
JJ: It also seems that we have to accept as a premise–to even get into the debate, you have to accept that somehow the US, along with Israel, that the US is somehow not the main driver of violence in the region, but is a force of stability.
NS: Precisely. We constantly hear, in nearly every single article that is written about this deal and its potential consequences, that Iran is a bad actor in the region and that it has nefarious activities, that it is doing all of these bad, bad things, and never mentions that we, the United States itself has wrought more destruction over that area of the world than anyone else, ever, and that Iran, which actually is a country in that region, has been prevented from playing a role that may be stabilizing, simply because it is seen as being in an adversarial position to US and Israeli interests.
JJ: Cheryl Rofer at Nuclear Diner noted recently that there are going to be disagreements on implementation of this deal, assuming it goes through; that's why there is a section on dispute resolution, and that won't mean the plan itself is broken. The implication being any hiccups or problems with inspections going forward will be put forth as evidence that the deal was a mistake. What are you thinking we should be looking for going forward in terms of media representation of this situation?
NS: I think that we're simply going to see the continuation of what we've seen for the past few decades, unfortunately. We are going to see allegations that Iran is cheating, and that Iran is doing everything they can to push the legal limits of this deal in order to prepare themselves, down the line, to break out in some nuclear fashion and destroy the world. The good news is that, at the base of this, the deal is here to stay, regardless of what Marco Rubio said about the deal could only last or will only last through the term of this president, seeing that the next president is not beholden to it.
That will not be the case. This deal is here to stay. It has many other partners that are already beginning to implement the terms of the agreement, and hopefully the Iranian nuclear dust will become normalized within the IAEA so that even more of these allegations will kind of fail to stir up all of these threats, all of these kind of hysterical claims.
But at the base of this, what the deal does is it affirms the peaceful nature of the Iranian nuclear program and it also effectively removes any threat of military action: With this deal in place, no one is going to bomb Iran.
JJ: David Swanson at World Beyond War wrote that one of the lessons is that we saw that there is never an urgent need for war, that wars are often begun with great urgency, not because there is no other option, but because delay might allow another option to emerge. This would seem, if anything, a case that we can use to say, it's not that stark a choice, at least there is another road to try.
NS: It's true, diplomacy is always an option; concerted diplomatic efforts can reap real rewards. I think we've seen that here. I think that everyone also needs to realize that the main concessions here, almost all of the concessions here, have been made by Iran. The US has given up nothing in this deal. It has all of its own rights intact. All that has happened is it will then stop imposing punitive sanctions on Iran for something that Iran was never doing in the first place.
Read the original post here.
From: Ahmad, Khurshid
Subject: FW: Responding to your message
Nobody has come up with better alternative. What moral right do we have to oppose the Iran Agreement when we have thousands of Nuclear Bombs. Israel has more than two hundred bombs. If we want to make our world safer, let us start with us first. - Khurshid Ahmad
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Sep 10, 2015, at 6:35 PM, Senator Rob Portman <no_reply@portman.senate.gov> wrote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Khurshid,
Given your concern about the Iran nuclear deal, I wanted to share with you my recent work in the United States Senate.
I'm extremely disappointed that 42 senators voted to block the Senate from disapproving the Iran agreement. This is one of the most important foreign policy decisions of this decade. This is a bad deal that fails to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon and allows Iran to increase its support of terrorism. I will continue to stand by Israel and other allies in the region. We should vote again next week and I call on my colleagues to stop the filibuster.
Earlier today, I went to the Senate floor to lay out why I am greatly opposed to the Iran nuclear agreement. Excerpts of my speech are below and video can be found here.
I am honored to represent you and the great state of Ohio in the United States Senate. For more information, I encourage you to visit my website at www.portman.senate.gov. Please keep in touch.
Sincerely,
Rob Portman; U.S. Senator
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remarks on Senate Floor by Senator Rob Portman on September 10, 2015
"I'm extremely disappointed that 42 senators voted to block the Senate from disapproving the Iran agreement," Portman stated. "This is one of the most important foreign policy decisions of this decade. This is a bad deal that fails to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon and allows Iran to increase its support of terrorism. I will continue to stand by Israel and other allies in the region. We should vote again next week and I call on my colleagues to stop the filibuster."
"I rise today in opposition to this agreement and I do so because I believe that it is bad for our country and bad for the world.
"There are very few votes we take in the United States Senate that have such a profound effect on our national security and the kind of world our kids and grandkids are going to inherit as the upcoming vote we'll take next week on this nuclear deal.
"Over the past couple months, I have taken the time to read the agreement carefully, I've attended the classified briefings, I've listened to my colleagues, I've talked to a lot experts on both sides of the issue...
"I've also listened to my constituents back home in Ohio. They've looked at this agreement too and they understand what's at stake...My calls and letters and emails are overwhelmingly opposed.
"Through the process, I measured the agreement not based on some abstract concept that I might have. I actually based it on the actual objectives and criteria that were set out by the international community, the United Nations, the United States of America, our government. I looked at it based on the red lines that we had drawn, and one of my great concerns about this agreement is that those red lines have not been honored.
"The broad goal, of course, the biggest red line laid out by Congress, the Obama Administration, and the United Nations Security Council, was very clear. Iran must stop and dismantle its nuclear weapons program.
"Remember, that when Congress, on a bipartisan basis, enacted crippling sanctions on Iran, it was not just to bring Iran to the table, which was a result, but to convince them to abandon their nuclear weapons program.
"I supported tougher sanctions to give leverage to the Obama administration even though curiously, they didn't want that leverage. They resisted Congress increasing those sanctions.
"Despite this resistance, serious sanctions were enacted, and Iran did come to the table. I hoped that with firm U.S. leadership, leading from the front, not from behind, we'd be able to bring the international community along...unfortunately, after reviewing the terms of the agreement, it is explicitly clear that these red lines – these objectives, these criteria we set out – have not been met.
"We now have an obligation to reject this deal and begin to restore the consensus both at home and abroad that the Iranian government must be isolated economically and diplomatically, until it agrees to the longstanding terms on which the United States and the international community have long insisted. Some will say that's fine but it is impossible. I disagree and respectfully quote President Obama: no agreement is better than a bad agreement...his is a bad agreement.
"Among the many serious flaws of this deal is the fact that Iran can continue research and development on more advanced centrifuges and can resume enrichment in 15 years, providing at best, only temporary relief. Inspections, one of the most important safeguards we have, are not 'anytime, anywhere' as Administration officials suggested.
"Under the deal, Iran can delay the inspection of suspected nuclear sites for up to 24 days...if the Iranians cheat, as they have in the past, we would have to employ a convoluted process to convince the international community to restore sanctions, a process we cannot rely on.
"According to some estimates, Iran could receive up to $150 billion in sanctions relief early in the agreement, with or without sustained compliance, which will encourage the Iranians to cause trouble, to further support terrorist groups they sponsor. As National Security Advisor Susan Rice acknowledged something pretty plain. She said, 'Iran is sending money to these groups now while they're under sanctions and they'll have more money to do it when sanctions are relieved.'
"There was a speech written that was never given. It was meant to be given on November 22, 1963. It was the day John F. Kennedy was assassinated. And he said in that speech about America's role – he said, 'Our generation, our nation, by destiny, rather than choice, are the watch guards on the walls of world freedom.' It's who we are. We've got to be tough in these negotiations and stand tall. Other countries look to us to be tall.
"This body must not sign off on an agreement that fails to honor our red-lines, that strengthens Iran's destabilizing influence in the region, and does nothing to address the behavior that threatens our allies and our legitimate national security interests here in this country.
"We should reject this agreement with Iran and tighten the sanctions on a bipartisan basis. The President should then use the leverage that only America possesses to negotiate an international agreement that does meet the longstanding goals of the United Nations, of the international community, of the United States of America, of this Congress and the President himself.
"We can't afford to get this wrong, folks. We owe it to our children and grandchildren to get this right. As noted in the beginning of my remarks, this is about what kind of world they are going to inherit. I urge my colleagues in the Senate to join me in rejecting this deal and pursuing a better way..."
End of MPEN e-newsletter
posted by lucas at 9:12 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home