Tag Archives: Kansas

Outside of my comfort zone

This morning I got news passing me by and it left me with questions. Now most of us have heard of the Muslim Brotherhood and as far as I can tell rightfully so, it is branded a terrorist organisation. But the CBC (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/florida-cair-muslim-brotherhood-declaration-9.7008351) gives us ‘Florida declares Council for American-Islamic Relations a terrorist organization’ and I was a little surprised. I had never heard of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), now this is not a complete surprise as I am not American and I am not Muslim, as such many who can make this claim are likely to escape that notion. And the most laughable setting is “The directive against the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) comes in an executive order DeSantis posted on X.” So what does Florida’s Governor Ron DeSantis fear more? Terrorists or the actual and factual media? What makes any organisation a terrorist organisation? Some say:

An organization becomes a terrorist group when it engages in, plans, or fosters violent, criminal acts for ideological (political, religious, etc.) goals, often by intimidating populations, with governments officially listing them for engaging in terrorist acts or advocating for them, making membership, support, or funding illegal. Key factors include intent to cause harm, use of violence, advancing an ideology, and official designation by a government body. 

In that case the setting is likely also met by MAGA America and we might get the same idea when we see “intent to cause harm, use of violence, advancing an ideology, and official designation by a government body” towards the settings of ICE, but that might be a stretch. So what makes CAIR a danger? And lets be clear, America seemingly set the premise of CAIR from its infancy in June 1994 to about 25 chapters all over America and we are given “Following the attack, Muslim-Americans were subjected to an upsurge in harassment and discrimination, including a rise in hate crimes nationally; 222 hate crimes against Muslims nationwide were reported in the days immediately following the bombing. The bombing gave CAIR national stature for their efforts to educate the public about Islam and religious bias in America”, as such, since when does education give any organisation a terrorist stature? And I get it, we get this from the person who went to war with a mouse. And we get more at TRT (at https://www.trtworld.com/article/19f5c755f766) where we see ‘Why CAIR’s advocacy has spooked pro-Israel American politicians’ it gives me a second jolt, you see, why does a pro Israel make that person anti Muslim and vice versa? I never got that part. So when we are given “While the federal government does not classify CAIR as a terrorist group, these state-level actions underscore an effort to silence one of the most prominent Muslim-American voices advocating for Palestinian rights and reflect growing unease among pro-Israel politicians over CAIR’s push for justice and accountability in US policy toward Israel.” Would it be that simple? An organisation is branded terrorist as it tries to stand for Palestinian rights? I have nothing against that, but it does require the eradication of Hamas and that is the linked unease. These people are all about coloring whatever they can, but they will not act for the common good of Palestine and as I personally see it, that requires the eradication of Hamas. Hamas has shown again and again that it is unwilling to make any deal, We see images of destroyed baby food and hidden caches of food and miraculously. These images are gone within hours. And we are left with “Hamas hid tons of baby formula and nutritional shakes meant for kids inside a warehouse to allow Gazans to starve and further its claims of widespread famine to undermine Israel, a US-based Palestinian activist claimed. Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib, an anti-Hamas activist, accused the terror group of hoarding food meant for infants and young children to purposefully increase starvation in Gaza and damage the public perception of Israel.

This sets the larger setting against organisations like CAIR and the seemingly good they do in America. I state ‘seemingly’ as it is about perceptions and kinda like CAIR, I have absolutely no idea where Governor Ron DeSantis gets his wisdom, but I fear the worst if he merely gives this to X. And the previous ‘facts’ were released on the New York Post, as such there is limited credibility as there isn’t more in the media. And the actions of Hamas have been going on for months (at least from late September), but the overarching issue is WHY is CAIR a terrorist organisation? I fail to see any evidence of that. There is merely the setting that the Florida Governor gives, whilst there is nothing in any of the other location which gives us Washington DC, Maryland, North Carolina, Alabama, Arizona, Los Angeles, Sacramento Valley, San Diego, San Francisco, Connecticut, Georgia, Chicago, Kansas, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Columbus, Cleveland, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh, Austin, Houston, Seattle and of course the Florida Chapter in Tampa. So where is the evidence that DeSantis has making the CAIR a terrorist organisation? And for that matter, how come in all these chapters, there is nothing else? 

Something does not make sense, although this man went to war with a mouse, so I reckon that there is likely another reason hiding in the tall grass. 

So whilst the Florida Phoenix (at https://floridaphoenix.com/2025/12/09/gov-desantis-welcomes-lawsuit-challenging-cairs-terrorist-designation/) gives us ‘Gov. DeSantis welcomes lawsuit challenging CAIR’s terrorist designation’ where we see “Monday, DeSantis declared via executive order that the Muslim Brotherhood and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) are foreign terrorist organizations. CAIR promised a lawsuit, alleging defamation and that the order is unconstitutional.” And it comes with the only response that likely matters “Muslim-rights group replies: ‘See you in court.’

Is that the only place that matters, the place where he can talk freely, A court? It would be a sad life he has if that would be the case, but after the Disney court setting, it might be his only option for now and praying on the fear of others is (speculatively) the only option left to him, because there is every chance that his previous ‘win’ of 59.37% is likely his last because there is every chance that he will lose Osceola County, Tampa (surprise), Palm Beach County and optionally Seminole County (where apparently some Disney workers reside) and if this is true, the CAIR following is al that is stopping from Florida to become a Democratic state on November 6th 2026. I reckon that the CAIR is the nail on his coffin because he is unlikely to get any support from President Trump, making this state in a state to change colours from red to blue. Won’t that make his heart blue in the process? And there is some setting for this, there are according to some numbers 127,172 Muslims in Florida and in for at least one electoral location that is all that is needed to throw over the numbers. And as I see it the chance that 0% Muslims will vote for Ron DeSantis is close to 100%. 

It is all up for debate, but there are settings that matter, but what they are and how they matter will seemingly be a new case for the courts of Florida. Have a great day

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics

Rules of the game

It isn’t a statement, it is actually a question. You see, something caught my eye in Al Jazeera today. The article (at https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/7/30/why-are-conservatives-claiming-google-is-covering-up-the-shooting-of-trump) gives us ‘Why are conservatives claiming Google is covering up the shooting of Trump?’. I took a look and I noticed the given “Google has come under fire from conservatives in the United States amid claims that the tech giant is suppressing information about the attempted assassination of Donald Trump in order to influence the presidential election.” Then we see “Google on Monday told NBC News that autocomplete was “not working as intended for some searches about the names of several past presidents and the current vice president”.

My issue is that there are other matters not being taken into account. I have partial knowledge of this and. Wonder on the stage we are facing. The first stage are the conservatives, the second stage are the influencers and the conspiracy theorists. Let me explain as best as I can. 

We can search for something direct [attempted assassination of Donald Trump] then we have the option [assassination + ”Donald Trump”] they are not the same you see the first one also gives use anything related to ‘attempted’ as such any combination of [attempted, assassination, of, Donald, Trump] will be caught in this. The problem is that the influencers know this, the conspiracy theorists know this and they are always try to put ‘their story’ above all the others. These two groups have elevated their knowledge of the search routines and the in’s and out’s above all others. Because they need their story to come on top.

Now consider these two groups, do you think that they influence the outcome? So when we see “autocomplete was “not working as intended”” the question becomes how to see ‘not working as intended’ I wonder how the other players influenced the ‘not working as intended’. I do not think that Google did anything wrong (speculation on my side), I think that there is more into this. You see what evidence do the Conservatives have? 

So do you think that Kansas Senator Roger Marshall who also accused Google of suppressing information looked into the whole range of this? I doubt it. These man tend to have less than an hour a day to look into matters. The Google setting requires close to a week of several people dedicated to search and autocomplete. Consider the small setting that the world has thousands of dedicated Search Engine Optimisation (SEO) people. Do you think that Google will mess around with that, or is it likely that these thousands as well as the influencers and conspiracy theorists have found a loophole that sets them above all others and when that is the case is there a clear case of malignant Google messing with an autocomplete. The last part is that it is ‘autocomplete’ as such the search could (or should) have been given completely and not via an autocomplete. Oh, and an autocomplete is relying on an anticipated result, yet when these results are pushed by SEO’s, influencers and Conspiracy theorists, what are the changes that the model sways?

All settings that could (not a given) been an influence and there is nothing of that in the Al Jazeera article. But in all this Kansas Senator Roger Marshall got his limelight. So I wonder how many holes I can shoot in that case, after all Donald Trump merely got his ear pierced and not by a qualified piercer. 

Oh and before we end this story, lets not forget that the conservatives use any option they can to get some limelight, did anyone take that into account as well?

Enjoy the day Monday is almost over for me, Vancouver will follow in 17 hours.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Science

Sexual abuse is apparently fine

The Washington Post gives us the news one hour ago. The article (at https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/private-letters-indicate-the-vatican-imposed-but-didnt-enforce-restrictions-on-former-cardinal-mccarrick/2019/05/28/dc3ca440-814f-11e9-b585-e36b16a531aa_story.html) gives us: ‘Private letters indicate the Vatican imposed, but didn’t enforce, restrictions on former cardinal McCarrick‘, the setting here is that “an aide to former cardinal Theodore McCarrick released excerpts from emails and letters laying out how the Vatican tried to quietly sanction McCarrick years before he was defrocked for sexual abuse“, so this was not in the short run, this is not a small matter, the Washington Post has additional articles on this in 2018, and it gets to be worse when we consider that clerical abuse expert Richard Sipe published excerpts from the 2005 and 2007 settlement documents in 2010. Yet I am still in another phase. You see most of us got the wakeup call through the movie Spotlight (2016), we had heard rumours left, right and chapels, but the fact on just how big and large the problem is has not made it to mainstream media to the degree that it should had. How can I as a Catholic, remain Catholic when I am confronted with: “send reported abusers for mental health counseling; reassign them to pastoral work regardless of what a professional recommends (i.e. restriction of access to minors); allow them to work again unsupervised; wait for another report of offence; repeat the cycle; cover it all up“, which we got from Richard Sipe in May 2010. And it gets worse when you consider: “The trouble is that it is sealed within the system. Few of the seminarian/priest victims will talk on record. They have everything to lose. Sexually active priests who have no intention of being celibate do everything to cover their tracks“, so according to the release evidence (excerpts from court cases) and the amounts settled was a lot; basically, all the funds that the people hand over for charity, for the church, for the needy. From that amount around $4 billion regarding cases that go back up to 35 years, the largest amount $600 million regarding 221 priests to dress the wounds of well over 500 victims. Whilst none of these clerics are in prison, these people give us lectures on humanitarian aid and the suffering in places like Saudi Arabia? How hypocrite can we get?

So as Newsweek, who was the source gave us one part, they also gave us BishopAccountability, who is actively ‘documenting the abuse crisis in the Roman Catholic Church‘ give us the additional “We document settlements involving 5,679 persons who allege sexual abuse by Catholic clergy. These survivors are only one-third of the 15,235 allegations that the bishops say they have received through 2009, and they are only 5% of the 100,000 U.S. victims“, the realisation that this is from the last 10 years and that it involves over 15,000 allegations, as i see it a large prison holding up to 25,000 priests called ‘Concilium Vaticanum locum seorsum‘ (Vatican Isolation Location) is required, build at the expense of, as well as funded by the Vatican. I reckon that in the end it is a cheaper way to resolve the issue, when we set these beasts in prison for 5-15 years, things might look up. How acceptable do you find the notion of: “wait for another report of offence; repeat the cycle; cover it all up“? How will you see this when it involves your child or a relative you were close to?

In all this the lamest of all reasons is seen with: Adult men make less instantly sympathetic victims than children, and the alleged incidents involving McCarrick are less headline-grabbingly horrifying“, so why is the DA not doing his/her job? Crimes were committed, hundreds of times, over and over again, yet we see no convictions, we see no culling of the acts by these priest. When you see all the evidence stack up with a failing to convict and as I see it: “before the 88-year-old simply passes away in seclusion“, is not a verdict or punishment, it is merely a stage of house arrest with optional benefits.

The only thing it does is leave us with the clarity that ‘abuse is fine‘, which is weird, because I know it to be 100% wrong, so why are people sitting on their hands? Why are people trivialising the fact that globally thousands of victims were created and the Catholic Church did next to nothing? At present there are 22 US senators who are Catholic, and how many of them have been active towards the prosecution of these clerics?

Even as lawmakers have passed a bill that would force priests to disclose information about child sexual abuse that they hear in the sacrament of Confession, we see in the Catholic sun that Archbishop José H. Gómez, vice president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, said he was “deeply disappointed”, which we cannot accept, that feeling of disappointment is a mere 15,235 allegations too late, a stage where we see that there are up to 15,235 victims in the US alone and for the longest time priests would cover for one another and more upsetting higher elements in the Church were part of the cover-up. It is when we consider the CruxNow (at https://cruxnow.com/church-in-the-usa/2018/08/24/what-new-jersey-bishops-now-retired-knew-about-mccarrick-settlements/) and we take notice of “The Metuchen Diocese made settlements of $53,333 and $100,000, where one (2006) was regarding a former priest who said he had been abused by McCarrick and others. This priest submitted the first known written complaint about McCarrick“, this puts Bishop Paul Gregory Bootkoski in the firing line, yet we also acknowledge that he also reported the offenses to law enforcement, yet what actions were taken are not known to me at present. Yet this indicates that at least a Cardinal or higher had to be aware of it as early as 2006, giving us 13 years of danger to more victims. However, to get back to Bishop Paul Gregory Bootkoski, you see Cardinal Donald Wuerl, Archbishop of Washington was never informed of the settlements according to the Catholic News agency. It gives questions when we read: “Cardinal Wuerl said last week that he was never informed that those settlements had been reached“, it leaves the actions of Bishop Paul Gregory Bootkoski open for debate and investigation. The fact that Richard Sipe personally wrote a letter to Benedict XVI in 2008 stating the hazard that is Theodore Edgar McCarrick (source: New York times, 2018) supports the view that the events were known in the very top of the Vatican, and as such, how can we remain comfortable as Catholics? I certainly do not feel comfortable at all.

When we realise that the Vatican was informed again in 2000 and 2006, yet in the end nothing was done for decades, that is the larger evil in all this and it is right there within the Vatican. The fact that according to news that McCarrick lives currently at St. Fidelis Friary in Victoria, Kansas and not in prison is really beyond me, the fact that the Washington Post gave us three hours ago that the Vatican imposed restrictions, but did not enforce them (at https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/private-letters-indicate-the-vatican-imposed-but-didnt-enforce-restrictions-on-former-cardinal-mccarrick/2019/05/28/dc3ca440-814f-11e9-b585-e36b16a531aa_story.html), gives rise to additional issues on several levels, yet if there is hope to be seen it does not come from the very top, but from the other side as Rev. Anthony Figueiredo, it is also in that article that we are made aware of “Cardinal Wuerl has previously stated — and he reiterates again — that he was not aware of any imposition of sanctions or restrictions related to any claim of abuse or inappropriate activity by Theodore McCarrick“, this ‘revelation’ is not about Cardinal Wuerl but on Bishop Paul Gregory Bootkoski, consider where McCarrick went, what kind of a danger he would optionally be to the people there; it is my personal view that the bishop created a dangerous place of intentional harm by keeping quiet, how Christian is that? How Christian are we when we merely accept that there is no prosecution to a lot more members of the clergy?

When we see: ‘Why ‘moderate’ Muslims need to speak loudly against terror‘, yet we also see that we do nothing against the Vatican on these transgressions, where is the greater evil, in the Vatican or in Mecca? Most Christians would consider Mecca to be ‘evil’ yet as we allow for the Vatican transgressions, can we even tell what evil is and what it looks like?

In the 80’s I knew what evil was and what it looked like. I felt like a proud Catholic going up against the likes of Hamas and Hezbollah. Today I am still against the likes of Hamas and Hezbollah, yet from those days I am not certain that my mind was playing for the right team, as such my mind wanders all over the place. What do you do when you learn after half a century that would have played for the wrong team? I know that Christians were never innocent, there is plenty of evidence that they wiped at least 17 civilisations from existence, the fact that Catholics are optionally to be seen as an internal cancer that is destroying itself from within is far more dangerous. If we are here to give rise to a better soul and the messenger cannot be trusted to protect our soul, where are we left?

If sexual abuse is fine, and we are no longer able to tell the falsehood of that, how doomed are we really? It is at this point that I recollect (in reality I searched for this) the Quran, specifically Taha 20:102: “The Day when the trumpet shall be blown, and on that day we shall gather the sinners together, blue-eyed (- the spiritually blind ones)“, to be honest ever since I saw Spotlight (2016) I have felt like a blind man, when you fear the people you would easily trust, how deep is the trouble that Christians face and how utterly wrongful has the Vatican reacted to all this, and how many more mistakes will they willingly make to let it all go away under cover of denial, settlement and ignorance towards the victims that they created?

I wonder if we learn the truth of that in time, all of us.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Politics, Religion