Thursday, April 18, 2013

And they shall trust in the name of the Lord.



1 Woe to her that is filthy and polluted, to the oppressing city!

2 She obeyed not the voice; she received not correction; she trusted not in the Lord; she drew not near to her God.

3 Her princes within her are roaring lions; her judges are evening wolves; they gnaw not the bones till the morrow.

4 Her prophets are light and treacherous persons: her priests have polluted the sanctuary, they have done violence to the law.

5 The just Lord is in the midst thereof; he will not do iniquity: every morning doth he bring his judgment to light, he faileth not; but the unjust knoweth no shame.

6 I have cut off the nations: their towers are desolate; I made their streets waste, that none passeth by: their cities are destroyed, so that there is no man, that there is none inhabitant.

7 I said, Surely thou wilt fear me, thou wilt receive instruction; so their dwelling should not be cut off, howsoever I punished them: but they rose early, and corrupted all their doings.

8 Therefore wait ye upon me, saith the Lord, until the day that I rise up to the prey: for my determination is to gather the nations, that I may assemble the kingdoms, to pour upon them mine indignation, even all my fierce anger: for all the earth shall be devoured with the fire of my jealousy.

9 For then will I turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the Lord, to serve him with one consent.

10 From beyond the rivers of Ethiopia my suppliants, even the daughter of my dispersed, shall bring mine offering.

11 In that day shalt thou not be ashamed for all thy doings, wherein thou hast transgressed against me: for then I will take away out of the midst of thee them that rejoice in thy pride, and thou shalt no more be haughty because of my holy mountain.

12 I will also leave in the midst of thee an afflicted and poor people, and they shall trust in the name of the Lord.

13 The remnant of Israel shall not do iniquity, nor speak lies; neither shall a deceitful tongue be found in their mouth: for they shall feed and lie down, and none shall make them afraid.

14 Sing, O daughter of Zion; shout, O Israel; be glad and rejoice with all the heart, O daughter of Jerusalem.

15 The Lord hath taken away thy judgments, he hath cast out thine enemy: the king of Israel, even the Lord, is in the midst of thee: thou shalt not see evil any more.

16 In that day it shall be said to Jerusalem, Fear thou not: and to Zion, Let not thine hands be slack.

17 The Lord thy God in the midst of thee is mighty; he will save, he will rejoice over thee with joy; he will rest in his love, he will joy over thee with singing.

18 I will gather them that are sorrowful for the solemn assembly, who are of thee, to whom the reproach of it was a burden.

19 Behold, at that time I will undo all that afflict thee: and I will save her that halteth, and gather her that was driven out; and I will get them praise and fame in every land where they have been put to shame.

20 At that time will I bring you again, even in the time that I gather you: for I will make you a name and a praise among all people of the earth, when I turn back your captivity before your eyes, saith the Lord.
zio

Zephaniah 3
King James Version (KJV)
.

Craig B. Hulet on the Boston bombing and other current events


Current Events

First hour guest, analyst of geopolitics and foreign policy Craig B. Hulet commented on the Boston bombing and other current events. Some media reports have compared the bombs to the IEDs used against US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, but he said this was inaccurate, as the IEDs tended to be more lethal than the 'homegrown' devices seen in Boston. If al-Qaeda had been involved, they might have used the devastating C4 explosive which would have killed every person within a hundred yards, he added. Hulet believes the perpetrator will eventually be caught, but it will take the combined effort of thousands of law enforcement officers now headed to Boston to work on the case. He also talked about the catastrophic explosion at a fertilizer plant near Waco, Texas, which happened earlier in the evening. 

.

More U.S. Troops Head to Jordan to Help Contain Syria, Hagel Says


Military continues planning for post-Assad Syria intervention


By PAUL D. SHINKMAN

April 17, 2013 RSS Feed Print




President Barack Obama and Jordan's King Abdullah II in a joint conference in Amman, Jordan. The U.S. is sending more military to Jordan to help contain the violence in Syria.



The U.S. is sending more troops and equipment to Jordan to help contain the violence in Syria, the Defense secretary said on Tuesday, adding the U.S. is preparing some sort of intervention in a post-Assad Syria.

[PHOTOS: Car Bomb Kills Dozens in Syria]

Secretary Chuck Hagel said he ordered the deployment of a U.S. Army headquarters unit to Amman, Jordan last week. This influx of troops will bolster the existing "small team of U.S. military experts" training the Jordanians in containing Syria's chemical weapons stockpile.

"These personnel will continue to work alongside Jordanian Armed Forces to improve readiness and prepare for a number of scenarios," he said while speaking before the Senate Armed Services Committee on Wednesday.

The U.S. has multiple plans in place to address a chemical weapons threat from Syria. Reports circulated mid-March that the Syrian regime attacked rebels with chemical weapons, which is still under investigation. President Barack Obama said the use of chemical weapons would be a "red line" for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

"We have been developing options and planning for a post-Assad Syria, and we will continue to provide the president and Congress with our assessment of options for U.S. military intervention," said Hagel.

[READ: Syria 'Chemical Attack' Leaves Both Sides Pointing Fingers]

"The U.S. military is constantly updating and adjusting tactical military planning to account for the rapidly shifting situation on the ground and to prepare for additional new contingencies," he said. "Not only those associated with the Syrian regime's chemical weapons stockpiles, but also the potential spillover of violence across Syria's borders that could threaten allies and partners.

The U.S. has also been working with Iraq and Turkey to protect their borders with Syria.

Hagel said military intervention should be seen as a last resort, as it would conflict with America's humanitarian efforts. To date, the State Department and USAID have sent $385 million in humanitarian assistance to Syria in the form of emergency supplies and food. It has also agreed to supplying the opposition movement directly with $117 million in yet unspecified non-lethal assistance, including medical equipment and communications.

[BROWSE: Political Cartoons on the Syrian Conflict]

"We are working now to assess how to allocate and deliver that additional assistance," Hagel said.

The secretary will travel to the region on Saturday to meet with leaders from Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E. Secretary of State John Kerry will be in Turkey this weekend to discuss ongoing security efforts there.

The U.S., Germany and the Netherlands sent six Patriot missile batteries to Turkey at the end of December to protect its border with Syria from missile strikes.



.
.

White House blames Congress for Gitmo prison staying open



Tue Apr 16, 2013 2:34PM




The White House on Monday blamed Congress for preventing the closing of the Guantanamo Bay detention prison amid a hunger strike and riots at the camp.

President Obama “remains committed” to closing Guantanamo Bay, something he said he would do in his first week in office in 2009, White House press secretary Jay Carney insisted.

“It is the president’s view that facility ought to be closed”, Carney said. “We have taken steps processing detainees, transferring them to third countries, but the obstacles to closing Guantanamo Bay have been raised by Congress”.

Violent riots broke out at one of the prison's camps this weekend after military authorities decided to end communal housing, instead moving prisoners to individual cells.

The Pentagon said the decision was made after detainees covered windows and surveillance cameras, a move that coincided with a hunger strike being staged by dozens of prisoners. At least one prisoner was injured by a rubber bullet in the clash with guards on Saturday.

Saturday's violence has refocused attention on the administration’s failed attempt to close the prison in Cuba. The Hill




FACTS & FIGURES

The Center for Constitutional Rights lists a few basic facts about Guantanamo, which are worth recalling:


779 men have been brought to and held in Guantanamo since January 2002, all of whom were Muslim.

604 men have been transferred from Guantanamo.

166 men remain imprisoned at Guantanamo.

92 percent of the men ever held in Guantanamo, according to the U.S. government, are not “al-Qaeda fighters”.

86 men have been cleared for release from Guantanamo but remain in detention, including 56 men from Yemen.

46 men are slated for indefinite detention without charge or trial. The U.S. government says they will not be prosecuted or released.

22 or more prisoners were under 18 when captured.

12 or more men fear torture or persecution in their countries of nationality. These men will remain in detention until other countries offer them safe havens and a chance to rebuild their lives.

10 years or more is the length of time most men have been held at Guantanamo without charge or trial.

9 men have died in Guantanamo.

0 senior government officials, including former President Bush and former Vice President Cheney, have been held accountable for the wrongful detention and torture at Guantanamo. Common Dreams



AGB/DB


.

President Obama’s Speech On Gun Control Bill Defeat (Transcript)



Gun Control

By TIME Staff

April 17, 2013


YURI GRIPAS / REUTERS

U.S. President Barack Obama arrives with Vice President Joe Biden to deliver a statement in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington April 17, 2013.

RELATED
Senate Guns Down Background Checks


Remarks provided by the White House Press Office


THE PRESIDENT: A few months ago, in response to too many tragedies — including the shootings of a United States Congresswoman, Gabby Giffords, who’s here today, and the murder of 20 innocent schoolchildren and their teachers –- this country took up the cause of protecting more of our people from gun violence.

Families that know unspeakable grief summoned the courage to petition their elected leaders –- not just to honor the memory of their children, but to protect the lives of all our children. And a few minutes ago, a minority in the United States Senate decided it wasn’t worth it. They blocked common-sense gun reforms even while these families looked on from the Senate gallery.

By now, it’s well known that 90 percent of the American people support universal background checks that make it harder for a dangerous person to buy a gun. We’re talking about convicted felons, people convicted of domestic violence, people with a severe mental illness. Ninety percent of Americans support that idea. Most Americans think that’s already the law.

And a few minutes ago, 90 percent of Democrats in the Senate just voted for that idea. But it’s not going to happen because 90 percent of Republicans in the Senate just voted against that idea.

A majority of senators voted “yes” to protecting more of our citizens with smarter background checks. But by this continuing distortion of Senate rules, a minority was able to block it from moving forward.

I’m going to speak plainly and honestly about what’s happened here because the American people are trying to figure out how can something have 90 percent support and yet not happen. We had a Democrat and a Republican -– both gun owners, both fierce defenders of our Second Amendment, with “A” grades from the NRA — come together and worked together to write a common-sense compromise on background checks. And I want to thank Joe Manchin and Pat Toomey for their courage in doing that. That was not easy given their traditional strong support for Second Amendment rights.

As they said, nobody could honestly claim that the package they put together infringed on our Second Amendment rights. All it did was extend the same background check rules that already apply to guns purchased from a dealer to guns purchased at gun shows or over the Internet. So 60 percent of guns are already purchased through a background check system; this would have covered a lot of the guns that are currently outside that system.

Their legislation showed respect for gun owners, and it showed respect for the victims of gun violence. And Gabby Giffords, by the way, is both — she’s a gun owner and a victim of gun violence. She is a Westerner and a moderate. And she supports these background checks.

In fact, even the NRA used to support expanded background checks. The current leader of the NRA used to support these background checks. So while this compromise didn’t contain everything I wanted or everything that these families wanted, it did represent progress. It represented moderation and common sense. That’s why 90 percent of the American people supported it.

But instead of supporting this compromise, the gun lobby and its allies willfully lied about the bill. They claimed that it would create some sort of “big brother” gun registry, even though the bill did the opposite. This legislation, in fact, outlawed any registry. Plain and simple, right there in the text. But that didn’t matter.

And unfortunately, this pattern of spreading untruths about this legislation served a purpose, because those lies upset an intense minority of gun owners, and that in turn intimidated a lot of senators. And I talked to several of these senators over the past few weeks, and they’re all good people. I know all of them were shocked by tragedies like Newtown. And I also understand that they come from states that are strongly pro-gun. And I have consistently said that there are regional differences when it comes to guns, and that both sides have to listen to each other.

But the fact is most of these senators could not offer any good reason why we wouldn’t want to make it harder for criminals and those with severe mental illnesses to buy a gun. There were no coherent arguments as to why we wouldn’t do this. It came down to politics — the worry that that vocal minority of gun owners would come after them in future elections. They worried that the gun lobby would spend a lot of money and paint them as anti-Second Amendment.

And obviously, a lot of Republicans had that fear, but Democrats had that fear, too. And so they caved to the pressure, and they started looking for an excuse — any excuse — to vote “no.”

One common argument I heard was that this legislation wouldn’t prevent all future massacres. And that’s true. As I said from the start, no single piece of legislation can stop every act of violence and evil. We learned that tragically just two days ago. But if action by Congress could have saved one person, one child, a few hundred, a few thousand — if it could have prevented those people from losing their lives to gun violence in the future while preserving our Second Amendment rights, we had an obligation to try.

And this legislation met that test. And too many senators failed theirs.

I’ve heard some say that blocking this step would be a victory. And my question is, a victory for who? A victory for what? All that happened today was the preservation of the loophole that lets dangerous criminals buy guns without a background check. That didn’t make our kids safer. Victory for not doing something that 90 percent of Americans, 80 percent of Republicans, the vast majority of your constituents wanted to get done? It begs the question, who are we here to represent?

I’ve heard folks say that having the families of victims lobby for this legislation was somehow misplaced. “A prop,” somebody called them. “Emotional blackmail,” some outlet said. Are they serious? Do we really think that thousands of families whose lives have been shattered by gun violence don’t have a right to weigh in on this issue? Do we think their emotions, their loss is not relevant to this debate?

So all in all, this was a pretty shameful day for Washington.

But this effort is not over. I want to make it clear to the American people we can still bring about meaningful changes that reduce gun violence, so long as the American people don’t give up on it. Even without Congress, my administration will keep doing everything it can to protect more of our communities. We’re going to address the barriers that prevent states from participating in the existing background check system. We’re going to give law enforcement more information about lost and stolen guns so it can do its job. We’re going to help to put in place emergency plans to protect our children in their schools.

But we can do more if Congress gets its act together. And if this Congress refuses to listen to the American people and pass common-sense gun legislation, then the real impact is going to have to come from the voters.

To all the people who supported this legislation — law enforcement and responsible gun owners, Democrats and Republicans, urban moms, rural hunters, whoever you are — you need to let your representatives in Congress know that you are disappointed, and that if they don’t act this time, you will remember come election time.

To the wide majority of NRA households who supported this legislation, you need to let your leadership and lobbyists in Washington know they didn’t represent your views on this one.

The point is those who care deeply about preventing more and more gun violence will have to be as passionate, and as organized, and as vocal as those who blocked these common-sense steps to help keep our kids safe. Ultimately, you outnumber those who argued the other way. But they’re better organized. They’re better financed. They’ve been at it longer. And they make sure to stay focused on this one issue during election time. And that’s the reason why you can have something that 90 percent of Americans support and you can’t get it through the Senate or the House of Representatives.

So to change Washington, you, the American people, are going to have to sustain some passion about this. And when necessary, you’ve got to send the right people to Washington. And that requires strength, and it requires persistence.

And that’s the one thing that these families should have inspired in all of us. I still don’t know how they have been able to muster up the strength to do what they’ve doing over the last several weeks, last several months.

And I see this as just round one. When Newtown happened, I met with these families and I spoke to the community, and I said, something must be different right now. We’re going to have to change. That’s what the whole country said. Everybody talked about how we were going to change something to make sure this didn’t happen again, just like everybody talked about how we needed to do something after Aurora. Everybody talked about we needed change something after Tucson.

And I’m assuming that the emotions that we’ve all felt since Newtown, the emotions that we’ve all felt since Tucson and Aurora and Chicago — the pain we share with these families and families all across the country who’ve lost a loved one to gun violence — I’m assuming that’s not a temporary thing. I’m assuming our expressions of grief and our commitment to do something different to prevent these things from happening are not empty words.

I believe we’re going to be able to get this done. Sooner or later, we are going to get this right. The memories of these children demand it. And so do the American people.




Thank you very much, everybody.



Also:

An Angry Obama Lashes Out After Gun Control Defeat

By Zeke J Miller

April 17, 2013

JACQUELYN MARTIN / ASSOCIATED PRESS
President Barack Obama speaks in the Rose Garden of the White House, Wednesday, April 17, 2013, in Washington, about measures to reduce gun violence.


Calling the defeat of his gun control efforts “a pretty shameful day for Washington,” a defiant and angry President Barack Obama announced in the Rose Garden Wednesday that the fight would go on.

Stoned faced and curt, the President used unusually pointed words to criticize the 45 Senators, including four Democrats, who successfully defeated the bill, which would have expanded mandatory background checks to gun shows and online sales. Obama said the

Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2013/04/17/an-angry-obama-lashes-out-after-gun-control-defeat/#ixzz2QoPHtogD
..
.

Boston poses new turf for Obama as "consoler-in-chief"

By LINDSEY BOERMA / CBS NEWS/ April 18, 2013, 6:00 AM




President Obama makes a statement in the White House briefing room about the bombings that took place at the Boston Marathon April 15, 2013 in Washington, D.C. / WIN MCNAMEE/GETTY IMAGES





Americans as a people "refuse to be terrorized," President Obama assured Tuesday, one day after twin bombs at the Boston Marathon left three of them dead and more than 100 others seriously wounded. On Thursday morning he arrives in Boston for an interfaith vigil honoring the victims of an attack being termed an act of "terror" but about which otherwise little is yet understood.

Commending the first responders, marathon runners and those at the scene and around the city of Boston who rose to the occasion and offered their assistance in the wake of the bombings, Mr. Obama on Tuesday offered as both a comforting hand to those shaken by the tragedy as well as a cautioning resolution to the threatening ethereal: "If you want to know who we are, what America is, how we respond to evil, that's it -selflessly, compassionately, unafraid."

"Consoler-in-chief": It's a role the president is familiar with, having been cast in it multiple times over the course of his first four years in the White House.


Obama to attend interfaith service honoring Boston victims
Obama: "The American people refuse to be terrorized"
Too early? Politics creeps into Boston Marathon aftermath


There was the mass shooting in 2009 at the Fort Hood, Texas army base, which killed 13 and injured 30. The 2011 assassination attempt of then-Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson, killed six and hurt 13 others. Last summer, a gunman sprayed a movie theater in Aurora, Colo., with bullets, leaving 12 dead and almost 60 others gravely wounded. And then there was Newtown, Conn. - a massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School that killed 20 first-graders and six of their educators - hurtling into the spotlight the most potentially roiling debate over gun control in decades.

Now, anew in his second term, the president stands on a stage set that begs that tried-and-true consoler costume, but offers a script yet unknown to him: No defined suspects, no cut-and-dried crime scene, no natural transition to a political fight as catharsis for the victims. It's sheer terrorism.

He has history as a guide. Following Giffords's shooting in 2011, the New York Times published a piece called "Executive Consolation," outlining moments of despair that have tried presidents "as they try to strike a precise balance of resolve and sympathy."

On the evening of Sept. 11, 2001, President George W. Bush from the Oval Office vowed to crack down on terrorism; three days later at Ground Zero, wielding a bullhorn, he responded to a worker who cried, "We can't hear you," pledging, "The rest of the world hears you - and the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon!"

In 1995, President Bill Clinton invoked scripture from the Bible to soothe a nation unnerved by the Oklahoma City bombing, and urged Americans to "overcome evil with good."

President Ronald Reagan in 1986, after an entire country had watched the space shuttle Challenger explode with seven astronauts on board, made the case that their work was not in vain: "I know it is hard to understand, but sometimes painful things like this happen," he said. "It's all part of the process of exploration and discovery. It's all part of taking a chance and expanding man's horizons. The future doesn't belong to the fainthearted; it belongs to the brave."

Summoning more or less the same level of rhetoric for which he's become known in the face of national tragedy, Mr. Obama, now, bears the same task Reagan did almost 30 years ago. Ahead of the Gipper's '86 address, R.W. Apple Jr. of the New York Times explained the president would have to "identify with the ensuing national grief - lead the mourning, in a sense - but he must also confine it and direct it," else the nation's mood would "evolve into a sense of national despair and futility."


Source

.
.

Is this the second Boston Marathon bomb? Photo shows bag where blast detonated


By Damien Fletcher


17 Apr 2013 01:08


A bag can be seen next to a mail box against a barricade as onlookers watch the marathon runners pass by

Scene: Bag left near mail box is highlighted
7News


These two pictures being studied by the FBI could hold vital clues to the Boston Marathon bombing.

In the first photo, a bag can be seen next to a mail box against a barricade as onlookers watch the marathon runners pass by.

A second picture, taken an hour later on Boylston Street outside the Forum Bar, shows victims of the blast lying where the bag had been.

The photo has been purposefully blurred by US TV channel 7News to mask out bodies of the dead and the maimed.

FBI forensic experts were last night studying also nylon fibres discovered at the scene of one of the blasts.

Horror: Maimed victims near where the bag had been
7News


The bombs were lethal devices consisting of metal, nails and ball bearings crammed into pressure cookers, it emerged yesterday.

Both bombs – packed with the deadly shards – were carefully placed in bags and hidden near the finishing line, according to US sources.

They had been deliberately designed to cause explosions that would injure, maim and kill innocent bystanders.

Law enforcement officials do not yet know what was used to detonate the six-litre pressure cooker bombs.

The devices have been used in India, Nepal, Pakistan as well as Afghanistan, according to an FBI and Homeland Security intelligence report from 2010.

One of the three devices used in the May 2010 New York Times Square attempted bombing was also a pressure cooker.

.

Wednesday, April 17, 2013

Doctor: 60 dead and over 100 injured in Texas fertilizer plant blast



CBS News - ‎12 minutes ago‎


Updated 11:48 PM ET. WACO, Texas An explosion Wednesday night at a fertilizer plant near Waco sent flames shooting high into the night sky, leaving the factory a smoldering ruin, causing major damage to nearby buildings and injuring numerous people.



.


Texas Fertilizer Plant Explosion Waco - Multiple Dead Reported Texas Fertilizer Plant Explosion






mrviralnews5

Published on Apr 17, 2013


Texas Fertilizer Plant Explosion Waco - Multiple Dead Reported

A massive explosion has rocked a fertilizer plant near Waco, Texas. Rescue crews are on the scene as a number of injuries have been reported, according to local affiliate KWTX. Several buildings are thought to have been destroyed.

There were accounts of people trapped in a nearby nursing home, which had been damaged, and residents stranded in an adjacent apartment building. Initial reports indicated that at least five victims were in critical condition.

The explosion occurred around 7:50pm local time. A fireball of nearly 100 feet high has been reported along with a massive power outage.

A large swath of the town of West, Texas was "leveled" in the explosion, according to WFAA-TV Dallas reporter Jason Whitely.

Nine emergency helicopters were reported to be en route to the local high school. Emergency officials were also trying to evacuate a neighborhood near the site of the explosion. Hospital officials told CNN they were anticipating as many as 100 victims.

Police officers were witnessed transporting the injured in their squad cars.

At least 10 other buildings are on fire, including the town middle school, according to other media outlets. Every available ambulance had been dispatched while fire crews from neighboring areas have rushed to the scene.

An emergency responder requested help over local radio with a "major collapse" on a second floor where children were thought to be trapped.

Multiple commenters on RT's story reported feeling the blast from their homes, which were located as much as dozens of miles from the fertilizer plant.

.

P.S. It seems that (RT) Russia Today has become a quotable source for news in the strange new world we are living in.  Heaven help US!


.

Texas fertilizer plant blast injures many

CBS/AP/ April 17, 2013, 11:48 PM




Scene from an explosion of a fertilizer plant in West, Texas on April 17, 2013. / CBS NEWS



Updated 11:48 PM ET



WACO, Texas An explosion Wednesday night at a fertilizer plant near Waco sent flames shooting high into the night sky, leaving the factory a smoldering ruin, causing major damage to nearby buildings and injuring numerous people.

The blast at the plant in West, a community north of Waco, happened shortly before 8 p.m. and could be heard as far away as Waxahachie, 45 miles north of West.

Debby Marak told The Associated Press that when she finished teaching her religion class Wednesday night, she noticed a lot of smoke coming from the area across town near the plant, which is near a nursing home. She said she drove over to see what was happening, and that when she got out of her car two boys ran toward her screaming that the authorities told them to leave because the plant was going to explode. She said she drove about a block before the blast happened.

Read more
.

Transformation of America


President Obama to travel to Boston for interfaith service on Thursday



PRESIDENT OBAMA

04/16/2013 5:42 PM


By Matt Viser, Globe Staff


WASHINGTON -- President Obama is planning to travel to Boston on Thursday morning to attend an interfaith service dedicated to those who were wounded or killed in Monday’s bombing near the finish line of the Boston Marathon.

Obama will speak at the interfaith service, which is scheduled to take place at the Cathedral of the Holy Cross at 11 a.m.

The White House confirmed the president’s attendance just as Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick announced it during a press conference in Boston.

Obama will no longer travel to the University of Kansas on Friday, which had been previously scheduled.

Matt Viser can be reached at maviser@globe.com.

Boston Marathon security stayed at high level



By Andrea Estes, Maria Cramer and Shira Springer | GLOBE STAFF

APRIL 17, 2013





DAVID L. RYAN/GLOBE STAFF

Security examined IDs for those seeking access to Dalton Street.


The city’s detailed security plan for the 117th running of the Boston Marathon shows the same all-out mobilization of officers, bomb-sniffing dogs and explosives specialists as was in place for last year’s race, an indication that the intensity of security preparedness has remained at a high pitch.

Interviews with law enforcement officials and a Globe review of Boston’s plan to police the race show that state and local authorities this year took extensive measures to protect hundreds of thousands of participants and spectators — including the deployment of air patrols, K-9 units, and more than 1,000 uniformed officers and soldiers along the 26-mile course and the finish line.

In Boston alone, there were 824 officers and civilians scheduled to work on Marathon day. That’s a 6 percent increase from 2012, according to copies of the Boston Police Department’s operational plans obtained by the Globe.

We’ve done as much as we can. Our aim is not to turn this into a police state,’” said Police Commissioner Edward Davis. “We have to allow commerce to occur. When you sweep an area to make sure there are no explosives, you have to control access to the area. Trying to do that along a 26-mile route is very difficult.’’

Related
PHOTOS

Day after Marathon blasts, investigation continues
Bombs were designed to spew destruction outward
Video: Somber, silent crowds gather at end of closed-off Boylston
Coverage: Boston Marathon bombings


“I have an 8-year-old child who was murdered here,’’ Davis said. “We will look at everything we’ve done and make sure we do everything we can in the future. These are soft targets. They’re purposely exploited by people.’’

Dogs swept the area for explosives twice before the first runners crossed the finish line, Davis said. Eleven were assigned — four from the Boston police (the same number as last year) and seven from the ­MBTA. Boston police have a total of 11 bomb-sniffing dogs, which are deployed in shifts.

“Dogs are not infallible,” Davis said. “With such a crowd, the dog can’t check every individual and package. The bomb was comprised of what’s called a pressure cooker, which seals the top of the device. If there is gunpowder in a sealed unit which isn’t emitting any odors, it may be difficult for a dog to detect.’’

Meanwhile, some other state and local agencies also insisted they had even stronger measures in place this year than they had in past years as they have learned from previous races and refined their plans since the Sept. 11 attacks.

The Massachusetts National Guard said it had 464 soldiers along the course, similar to last year and up from around 400 in 2002.

Our operational plans have never been as thorough and sophisticated as they are today,” said David Procopio, a spokesman for the Massachusetts State Police.

Former Boston police commissioner Paul F. Evans said it is impossible to prevent a terrorist attack without changing what makes the Boston Marathon the Boston Marathon.

“If you want a secure environment, you don’t have any spectators,’’ Evans said. “And that’s not what Boston is about.’’

Davis noted some security measures are simply impractical: “We consider all options but the problem with metal detectors is that they are only good in areas that are controlled and you can’t control something 26 miles long,” the police commissioner said.

Bags and credentials are checked for spectators in the grandstands where VIPs and special guests sit and access is strictly controlled.

There is a small area around the grandstand that is controlled. . . . The only people who can get in are credentialed,” Davis said.

“That’s because people like the governor and mayor are coming in there. It is a zone set up with increased security. . . . If we tried to do the same thing across the street, all of the businesses would have to shut down.”

The Boston bombing is prompting other road races around the country to rethink their own security plans for future races, even as some of them already have taken steps to lock down access to key portions of the race route.

Organizers of the London Marathon, like Boston among the premier running events around the world, vowed to go on with the race on Sunday – but with extra security. The marathon, which passes by such iconic landmarks as Buckingham Palace, is expected to draw 36,500 runners and 700,000 spectators.

“The race will be going ahead and we will be deploying extra resources as are necessary,” said Nick Bitel, chief executive of the London Marathon.

The New York City Marathon concludes inside Central Park, and race organizers convert the finish area into a secure zone. Nonrunners must have tickets or credentials to enter the areas immediately surrounding the finish line, and all bags are checked.

Other security precautions taken by New York City include a contained start at Fort Wadsworth on Staten Island that requires credentials or a race number for admittance. The baggage that marathoners use for extra clothing are made of clear plastic, and all items inside must be visible for security reasons. The clear bags and other heightened security measures around the start and finish were put in place following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

“9/11 was a game changer in how we approached all security elements across the marathon,” said Mary Wittenberg, chief executive of New York Road Runners which organizes the New York Marathon. “Every year, we’re always adjusting and improving. Now, we go back again.’’

The next major running event on the Boston-area race calendar is the James Joyce Ramble, a 10K that will take place in Dedham on April 28. Even before the Boston Marathon bombings, Ramble organizers had planned to have increased security at its postrace party, and now they are considering more security measures along the course.

What happened in Boston “was certainly why I didn’t have any sleep at all,” said Martin Hanley, founder and managing director of the event. “We are going to try and make everybody safe.’’Todd Wallack, Jonathan Saltzman and Thomas Farragher of the Globe staff contributed to this report.


.

Attacks Put Spotlight on Boston Counterterrorism Center


April 16, 2013, 5:50 PM ET



[Joel Schectman]
Joel Schectman
Reporter

Boston’s Regional Intelligence Center is poised to aid investigators as they search for suspects in yesterday’s bombing.

The center is one of America’s 77 intelligence-sharing facilities, known as fusion centers, that allow investigators to pool data from local, state and federal sources. The state-run centers were funded by the Department of Homeland Security in the years after 9/11 to address the lack of information sharing among agencies, an issue cited as a factor in the government’s failure to prevent the 2001 attacks.

As investigators attempt to connect the dots in yesterday’s attack, Boston’s fusion center will allow authorities to tap thousands of law enforcement data sources, along with public data like information from credit agencies, said Mike Sena, president of the National Fusion Center Association, and a state commander of the Northern California Regional Intelligence Center. “This is what fusion centers were built for,” Mr. Sena said.

Boston’s fusion center can help investigators scour for connections among potential suspects, by mining hundreds of law enforcement sources around the region, ranging from traffic violations, to jail records and criminal histories, along with public data like property records, Mr. Sena said. As the investigation widens, and investigators identify suspects, the system can help lead authorities to co-conspirators. For example, the system could flag a possible associate of the suspect by finding a past traffic ticket issued to someone driving the perpetrator’s car.

The system also allows local investigators to access the federal Homeland Secure Data Network, giving screened personnel access to classified reports from federal agencies like the Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Mr. Sena said.

The fusion center system has its shortcomings, however. Despite their strengths, fusion centers are hampered by the kinds of data silo issues that are familiar to any CIO of a large company, according to Mr. Sena.

For example, while authorities can access an array of data sources from their own state, data collected in fusion centers in other states cannot be automatically accessed–that information needs to be requested and manually uploaded. And interoperability issues that stem from a multiplicity of proprietary search tools—as well as police record systems built by different vendors–means even information from within California’s 70 data systems, often has to be reformatted before it can be pooled and analyzed, slowing investigations, Mr. Sena said. And for security reasons, classified reports from federal agencies cannot be accessed on the same machines, Mr. Sena said. “Not being able to pull that data together is a huge problem,” Mr. Sena said. “When you are dealing with having to pull in information from 70 systems you can never be that speedy and time is of the essence with real time crime support and investigation.”

Last year, the Senate subcommittee on investigations released a report questioning the effectiveness of the centers in fighting terrorism and protecting privacy.

Still, without the fusion centers, investigators would need to physically pull paper records from dozens of sources, and would need to obtain federal reports through a lengthy request process, Mr. Sena said. “It gives investigators access to an array of data they would not even know about otherwise — it would be stovepiped away.”

Source

.

NSA claims its huge datacentre won't snoop on US citizens' email



It's for 'cyber security' instead

By Lawrence Latif
Tue Apr 16 2013, 12:15




THE UNITED STATES NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY (NSA) has denied that a huge Utah datacentre will be used to monitor US citizens' email.

The NSA is building a $1.2bn datacentre in Utah that the organisation claimed is the largest defence construction project in the country since the Pentagon was built, or at least the largest it would publicly disclose.

Following a report that suggested the NSA's Utah datacentre might be used to trawl through the emails of US citizens, the NSA said its new datacentre will not be used for such activities.

Generally US authorities need to obtain a warrant before peeking at any US citizen's email. The NSA said it is "unwavering" in its respect for US laws and US citizens' civil liberties, a statement that might raise the eyebrows of some Americans.

The NSA said in a statement, "Many unfounded allegations have been made about the planned activities of the Utah Data Center. One of the biggest misconceptions about NSA is that we are unlawfully listening in on, or reading emails of, US citizens. This is simply not the case." Instead the NSA said the datacentre will be used to provide cyber security services.

The NSA tried to deflect attention from the snooping allegations by claiming that building the datacentre has created somewhere between 5,000 and 10,000 jobs, with 100 to 200 permanent jobs to keep the facility ticking over.

The NSA's Utah datacentre is scheduled to be completed in September.
Source
.

Security Heightened in US Cities




RELATED ARTICLES

FBI Takes Boston Bombing Investigation 'Worldwide'
Obama: Boston Bombings an 'Act of Terrorism'
FBI: Boston Bombs Packed in Pressure Cookers
NY Tightens Security in Aftermath of Boston Blasts



Suzanne Presto

April 16, 2013


American cities are assessing security following Monday's bombing at the Boston Marathon. Washington DC went ahead with an annual parade as authorities across the country took security measures and people responded to them.

Washington's Emancipation Day parade, which commemorates the emancipation of more than 3000 slaves in 1862, went on as planned after city officials said there would be an increased police presence.

The heightened security wasn't evident to Elizabeth Rau, who came to see the parade. But she said she's sure it's there.

"I think it'd be more likely to get in a car accident than anything happening here," said Rau.

Peter Boyce said the attack in Boston reinforced his plan to attend the festivities.

"This is a land of freedom, and we will not be deterred by any cowardly acts on this country, whether it be in Boston or anyplace else, and that is why it was important that we come out here today," said Boyce.

It was personal for Boyce. He attended the parade with his wife and two young sons, but has another child who lives in the Boston area.

"We have a son who was on lockdown at Harvard yesterday," he said. "And I told him that definitely that we would make sure that we would come out in full force today to come to this Emancipation Day parade."

Deltha Jeffries brought her granddaughter. She said security concerns did cross her mind.

"I thought about there being a large crowd and this being another opportunity for terrorists to infiltrate," said Jeffries. "But, you know, if you're going to worry about that all the time, you're never going to have fun in the rest of your life."

President Obama said the FBI is investigating the Boston attack as an act of terrorism.

"In the coming days, we will pursue every effort to get to the bottom of what happened, and we will continue to remain vigilant. I've directed my administration to take appropriate security measures to protect the American people," said President Obama.

Those measures extend to the president's residence. A section of Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House, often filled with tourists, is now closed to pedestrians.

In New York City, patrols near hotels were increased after the bombing, said Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly.

"We also patrolled houses of worship - we'll continue to do that - and significant infrastructure locations in the city, iconic potential targets: Rockefeller Center, Empire State Building, locations such as that," said Kelly.

The security presence was visible in New York City's train stations, its airports and in Times Square, which was targeted in a failed attack three years ago.

Across the country, from downtown Chicago to the baseball stadium of the Los Angeles Dodgers, the increased security presence was visible.

There was also another inescapable sight: the nation's flag at half-staff in honor of Boston's dead.


Source
.

On God's Side: What Religion Forgets and Politics Hasn't Learned About Serving the Common Good






sojotube

Published on Apr 1, 2013


New York Times Bestselling Author Jim Wallis discusses the themes of his latest book, On God's Side.

Special thanks to Matt Willingham for extra video footage.


.

Keep Sunday Special's Latest Leaflet



Keep Sunday Special has released a new leaflet about our campaign and the reasons that we think Sunday should be special. Click here to see it! If you would like us to send you some leaflets to share with friends, colleagues or others then please get in touch.
.
.

Atheists find a Sunday-morning connection with other nonbelievers



Kimberly Winston | Apr 16, 2013


HOUSTON (RNS) Sunday mornings at Houston Oasis may have the look and feel of a church, but there’s no cross, Bible, hymnal or stained glass depictions of Jesus. There’s also nary a trace of doctrine, dogma or theology.

But the 80 or so attendees at this new weekly gathering for nonbelievers come for many of the same reasons that others pack churches in this heavily Christian corner of the Bible Belt — a sense of community and an uplifting message that will help them tackle the challenges of the coming week, and, maybe, the rest of their lives.

Just because you don’t believe in God does not mean you do not need to get together in community and draw strength from that,” said Mike Aus, a onetime Lutheran pastor who is now an atheist and founder of Houston Oasis.

“We are open to any message about life as long as no dogmatic claims are made.”



.
.

Tuesday, April 16, 2013

Hundreds gather for vigil on Boston Common


Updated 4:55 pm, Tuesday, April 16, 2013
Ads by Google

New by Eric Schmidt



Marion Kaucic participates in a candle light vigil at Friendship Square in Moscow, Idaho, on Monday, April 15, 2013. Local runners held the vigil and a 2.62-mile run in support of those injured in the bombings at the Boston Marathon. Photo: Moscow-Pullman Daily News, Geoff Crimmins



BOSTON (AP) — Hundreds of people gathered for a vigil on the Boston Common sang songs and lit candles one day after the bombing attack on the city's marathon.

Several hundred people turned out Tuesday evening with banners declaring "Peace here and everywhere" and "Boston, you're our home."

Participants sang songs including "Amazing Grace" and "The Star-Spangled Banner."

Three people were killed and more than 170 people were injured in the bombings near the end of the race on Monday.

Northeastern University student Scott Turner hugged friends, wept and prayed at the vigil. He said the people of Boston would not be afraid and would respond by showing peace and supporting one another.

There was also a heavy military presence on the Common with dozens of National Guard troops.




.

The Boston College Community "Decides When Our Marathon Ends"


By Brian Favat on Apr 16 2013, 9:22am @bcinterruption 13

 


Apr 15, 2013; Cleveland, OH, USA; The Terminal Tower in Cleveland was lit red, white and blue during a game between the Cleveland Cavaliers and the Miami Heat at Quicken Loans Arena to show support after the explosions at the Boston Marathon. - USA TODAY Sports


For Boston.


In light of yesterday's horrific events at the 117th Boston Marathon, a group of Boston College students is organizing a walk to remember, honor and stand up for all those affected by the bombings. On Friday, April 19 at 4:30pm, students will walk from Boston College to Boston to honor those who did not get to finish, those injured and those who lost their lives.

According to the Facebook event page, the walk is to show everyone that "we decide when our marathon ends."

As of this writing, over 4,500 students have joined the Facebook event to walk the last five miles of the Marathon.

Boston College's Assistant Professor of Political Science Peter Krause also wrote a poignant and touching Letter to the Editor of The Heights calling on the community to respond to the attacks with renewed community spirit.

"People often ask me what average citizens can do in response to terrorism. Well, here is your answer: Make sure that next year's Boston Marathon has more participants and spectators than any other in history. The people who carried out these attacks must be tracked down and punished by law enforcement, but we as a society get to decide if the attacks have a broader impact. We get to decide if we respond to these terrible acts with fear and hatred or with renewed community spirit."

Krause, who admittedly hates running and has never run more than five miles in his life, vows to run in next year's Boston Marathon and raise money for those affected by the tragedy. I'm certain the Boston College community's response to yesterday's events will make the 118th running of the Boston Marathon the best one yet.

Ever to Excel.


.
.
.

Virginia Tech Massacre (on its Anniversary)



Massacre at Virginia Tech | 2008 | Full Episode



FULLEHQ


Published on Sep 24, 2012


Early in the morning on 16 April 2007, on the Virginia Tech campus in America a 23-year-old student called Seung-Hui Cho killed 32 people before turning his gun on himself. The incident became the biggest mass shooting in peacetime US history. This film marks the one year anniversary. Using extensive access to key witnesses, Massacre at Virginia Tech delves into the mystery of how Cho, a young man with no criminal history, became a mass murderer. This gripping and thoughtful film asks - Who was this deranged young man and what caused him to plan and carry out this tragic event?

.

Baptist minister takes North Carolina General Assembly to task in editorial over state's attempt to legislate Christianity



Baptist minister takes North Carolina General Assembly to task in editorial over state's attempt to legislate Christianity saying NC needs a refresher course in what religious freedom means


BY DAKOTA O'LEARY
ON APRIL 13, 2013 AT 1:25 PM



Reverend Dr. C. Weldon Gaddy, president of the Interfaith Alliance, a nonpartisan, grassroots organization that champions religious freedom, has had enough of attempts in this country by various conservative politicians to demonize one religion (or atheists) while proclaiming religious freedom for another. Namely, Dr. Gaddy is calling a spade a spade and says that the state of North Carolina, after a disastrously failed attempt by the North Carolina GOP to make Christianity the official religion of the state (the NC Speaker of the House killed it), can't use the phrase"religious freedom" in order to persecute and suppress religions they don't like or do not understand. In an editorial for the NC News-Observer, he explains that this attempt to make Christianity the official religion of NC, in violation of the Constitution is nothing more than an excuse to justify religious bigotry:

It is becoming increasingly clear that some members of the N.C. General Assembly are in critical need of a refresher course on the meaning of religious freedom.

When asked by a constituent whether she would support a Muslim offering a prayer before the state legislature, Rep. Michele Presnell responded by saying, “No, I do not condone terrorism.” She went on to justify her position by saying we “need to start taking a stand on our religious freedom or it will be whisked away from us.”

Presnell’s comments follow the just-quashed attempt to enable North Carolina to establish an official religion in clear violation of the U.S. Constitution – again under the guise of religious freedom. These preposterous acts show no grasp of the reality of a historic understanding ofthe meaning of religious freedom and show how desperately we need to improve education on the meaning and importance of religious freedom in our nation.

In fact, Presnell’s comments contribute to a climate in which more and more attempts are made to “whisk” away the religious freedom of American Muslims. Make no mistake, the rights of other minority religions would fall quickly in the environment sought by this North Carolina legislator.

Already American Muslim communities have had to fight tooth and nail for permits to build mosques against pushback from their neighbors; once built, their mosques and religious schools have been vandalized and attacked. Hate crimes are still being committed against individuals who so much as “look Muslim.” Is that religious freedom? Is that what Presnell desires for all religions?

It is my duty as a religious leader, as a defender of religious freedom and simply as an American citizen concerned with the future of our democracy to remind Americans that being a Muslim is not synonymous with being a terrorist and supporting the American Muslim community’s right to worship is not synonymous with supporting terrorism. The time is long past for us to stop demonizing this American faith community and judging a faith practiced by billions by those who twist and misappropriate its teachings to serve their violent goals.

Presnell and I agree that we must always take a stand for our religious freedom – and I truly mean “our,” collectively. As a Baptist, I cannot fight just for my own freedom to worship. I fight for my Jewish, Muslim, Sikh, Hindu, Christian (and the list goes on) sisters’ and brothers’ rights as well – and the rights of those who choose not to worship. That is the inclusion at the heart of what our First Amendment-given religious freedom means.

To tell the truth, religious freedom has always been in need of defending in America. But a bill that could have led to a statewide-established religion, a bill that sought to “defend” religion against a spate of court cases invalidating several North Carolina county boards’ practices of opening sessions with (almost exclusively Christian) prayers harms religious freedom vastly more than protects it.

Neither my Christian faith nor my religious freedom is in any way threatened by these court cases. Legislative prayers, if they are to continue, should be nonsectarian and inclusive. Here again, having such prayers delivered by clergy of other faiths in no way threatens my faith.

Baptists have traditionally fought for religious freedom. Of all religious sects in America, Baptists were the most persecuted from the 18th century onwards, because their religious practices were not in line with the established Puritan faith, and used their persecution to become the most vociferous champions of religious freedom and separation of church and state. Examples of the type of persecution Baptists endured in America during this time follow, listing just a few injustices:


II. Baptist Persecutions in Virginia

A. Baptists entered Virginia in early 18th century

B. First Virginia Baptists thrown in jail in Spotsylvania in 1768, for refusing to stop preaching, cited with disturbing the peace (John Waller, Lewis Craig, James Childs)

C. Imprisonment of Baptists continued until at least 1778, for periods of up to 5 months

D. Baptists accused of child abuse (because they did not baptize their children as infants), Baptist marriages not recognized

E. Persecutions included (from court records, as compiled by Lewis Peyton Little, Imprisoned Preachers and Religious Liberty in Virginia):

"pelted with apples and stone"
"ducked and nearly drowned by 20 men"
"commanded to take a dram, or be whipped"
" jailed for permitting a man to pray"
"meeting broken up by a mob"
"arrested as a vagabond and schismatic"
"pulled down and hauled about by hair"
"tried to suffocate him with smoke"
"tried to blow him up with gun powder"
"drunken rowdies put in same cell with him"
"horses ridden over his hearers at jail"
"dragged off stage, kicked, and cuffed about"
"shot with a shot-gun"
" ruffians armed with bludgeons beat him"
"severely beaten with a whip"
"whipped severely by the Sheriff"
"hands slashed while preaching"

Baptist Distinctives.org explains the historically Baptist position on separation of church and state based on Biblical teaching (a marked difference than the overt efforts to align fundamentalist Christianity with American government and deny separation of church and state as has been done by the Southern Baptist Convention and pseudo-historian/revisionist David Barton:


The Bases for a Free Church in a Free State

For Baptists, the concept of a free church in a free state rests not on political theory nor on human documents but on the word of God. The Baptist belief in religious freedom and its corollary, the separation of the institutions of church and state, come from the Baptist commitment to the authority of the Bible.

What is meant by the terms “church” and “state”? The term “state” refers to governments. The Bible indicates that governments are ordained by God to provide law and order (Romans 13:1-5). Government leaders are to act for the benefit of the citizens (1 Peter 2:13-14). Baptists and other Christians are to honor and pray for government officials (1 Timothy 2:1-3; 1 Peter 2:17), pay taxes (Matthew 22:17-22; Romans 13:6-7) and obey the government except when obedience would be clearly contrary to God’s will (Acts 4:19-20; 5:29). Historically, Baptists have affirmed their loyalty to the state.

The term “church” refers to religious organizations. For Baptists, this includes both local congregations and various entities established for religious purposes, such as associations, conventions, schools and institutions for ministry. Baptists teach that the nature of “church” is to spread the gospel of Jesus Christ (Acts 1:8), to teach doctrine and develop believers (Matthew 28:19-20; Ephesians 4:11-13) and to minister in Christ’s name (Matthew 25:31-46). The church is to rely on the sword of the Spirit and not the sword of the government in c a rrying out its mission.

Ideally, the relation of church and state is mutually beneficial. For example, the state is to provide order and safety; these are useful to the church in carrying out its mission (Acts 13-16). And the church contributes to a positive social order by helping to develop law-abiding, hard-working, honest citizens (Ephesians 4:24-32; 1 Peter 2:11-17).

Baptists contend that this mutual benefit works best when the institutions of church and state are separate and when neither seeks to control the other. The state is not to dictate doctrine, worship style, organization, membership or personnel for leadership to the church. The church is not to seek the power or the financial support of the state for spiritual ends. Such is the model set forth in the New Testament.

The very nature of the gospel and of church calls for such a relationship. The Bible reveals that humans are created by God with a competency to know and follow his will (Genesis 1:27). Following God’s will should be a free choice, not coerced by either church or state. Salvation in Christ is the result of free choice to believe in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior (John 3:16; Ephesians 2:8-10). Thus, neither church nor state should ever interfere with the free proclamation of the gospel or with the freedom of people to accept or reject it.

Likewise, churches ought to be composed of people who have freely chosen to be baptized and to congregate (Acts 2:41-42). People should support the churches by voluntary contributions of tithes and offerings (2 Corinthians 8:1-15). Only Jesus is to be Lord, never any government or ecclesiastical organization (Ephesians 4:11-16; Philippians 2:8-11).





P.S. Where's NARLA when you need it?
...

.

Herman Cain returns to spotlight with American Black Conservatives group





(Win McNamee/GETTY IMAGES) - Former GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain speaks at a Tax Day Rally at the U.S. Capitol on April 16, 2012.


By Krissah Thompson, Published: April 15


Washington, the Hermanator is back.

Awwww shucky ducky.


Remember him?

Herman Cain steps up to microphones at the Willard hotel on Monday after a two-day meeting of a dozen black conservatives that he pulled together. Mr. 9-9-9 has come out of the meetings with a catchy name for his group. They are the ABCs — American Black Conservatives.

After surging to the front of the GOP primary field in 2011 — before flaming out amid a wave of sexual harassment allegations — Cain returned home to Georgia to his radio show, relatively forgotten. Standing before the mikes on Monday he seems to sense another moment in the blazing sun on what happens to be an overcast day in the nation’s capital — a moment not solely for himself but for an entire cadre of “like-minded Americans who happen to be black.”

The former chief executive of Godfather’s Pizza acted as something of a godfather to the ABCs, including the famed neurosurgeon Ben Carson, who has reaped his share of controversy of late for his remarks lumping together homosexuality, pedophilia and bestiality. The pair were joined by the founder of the National Black Chamber of Commerce, a former Ohio secretary of state, a former U.S. Housing and Urban Development secretary, a radio personality and a niece of Martin Luther King Jr., who has become a conservative activist.

Together, they are searching for solidarity at what appears to be a critical juncture for minorities in a Republican Party that has acknowledged it is too old and too white to keep pace with an increasingly diverse electorate. And Cain is putting himself out front. Again.

His news conference is held in a room named for progressive Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis. In attendance: three cameramen and three reporters, including one from the conservative publication NewsMax and another from CNN who is visibly disappointed when told that Carson had skipped the Monday event.

Beneath a gilded chandelier, Cain explains the rationale behind the ABCs.

“When black conservatives are attacked, they sometimes are more viciously attacked than white conservatives,” Cain says. “One of the themes of this meeting is: We will not be silenced; if anything, our voice collectively will be stronger.”

Carson, for one, hasn’t exactly been silent in recent weeks. Earlier this month, he gave as good as he got as part of a Fox News segment focused on black conservatives and during an appearance on a conservative talk radio show hosted by Mark Levin, where he called white liberal critics “the most racist people there are because they put you in a little category, a box: ‘You have to think this way, how could you dare come off the [liberal] plantation?’ ”

Mark Q. Sawyer, a professor of political science at UCLA has sparred with black conservatives on Fox News and interprets the “plantation” comments in a dramatically different way.

What black conservatives are really saying is that “you black people aren’t really smart enough to know what’s good for you,” he said. “Their argument is it isn’t that the current Republican Party needs to create policies that appeal to African Americans. It’s that black people really need to think harder about politics.”

At a fundraiser for his Carson Scholars Fund on Sunday afternoon, Carson deflected such criticism, saying, “If you’re black and conservative, you must be a hater.”

Sawyer sees more complexity. He put Cain and Carson in a line of black conservative thinkers dating back to Booker T. Washington, who was criticized for his conservative, pull-yourself-up-by-the-bootstraps approach and was supported primarily by white industrialists. The audience for the ABCs isn’t much different, Sawyer argued.

“The people who buy their books, who clap for them the loudest, very few of them are black,” Sawyer said. “Not a single one of those people has any credibility beyond their personal stories or has really had a message that large groups of people in the African American community finds persuasive.”

Cain’s confab was also noticeable for the African American conservatives not in attendance: former congressman J.C. Watts, former Bush secretary of state Condoleezza Rice and Republican Sen. Tim Scott (S.C.). Cain said the dozen people who came were those who were top-of-mind for him.

“There were one or two dozen others I could have asked,” Cain said. “I hope they’re not offended.”

Watts said he was invited and would have attended had it not been for a scheduling conflict. In a phone interview Monday, he said he was distressed about the state of black conservatives, whom he would like to see, along with others in the Republican Party, address a broad range of issues important to the African American community: development of low-income communities, minority health disparities, poverty and investment in historically black universities. Instead, attention has focused on the evocative language and aggressive tactics of black conservatives. (Much was written of Carson’s in-your-face excoriation of President Obama’s policies — as Obama sat nearby — at the National Prayer Breakfast earlier this year.)

“I have tried to stay away from that kind of thing,” Watts said. “I do think it matters how you say it, but in all fairness, you can point to language on the left that has been just as detrimental, that has poisoned the well.”

Watts said he found himself a player in that trap in 1997 when, in defending himself against criticism that he was a “sell-out,” he said some black Democrats were “race hustling poverty pimps.” He now regrets those words.

Sawyer said there is a real question of whether black conservatives, such as Cain and Carson, can gain any traction with black voters without developing policies of the sort suggested by Watts.

“The assumption has to be that black people just like to hear people like themselves talk, and they don’t really care about the substance,” Sawyer said. “That is a problematic stereotype of the same ilk as the ‘Marco Rubio is a [GOP] savior’ kind of idea. It isn’t just that Latino voters want to see a Latino. The substance matters to them. The policy matters them.”

Assistant Democratic House Leader James E. Clyburn (S.C.), whose father was a fundamentalist minister in South Carolina, said blacks have a long history with conservatism — and there is a role for black conservatives to play.

“My father was . . . by any definition of the word conservative, but by any definition of liberalism, he was very liberal,” Clyburn said. “I learned growing up that there’s a time to be conservative and a time to be liberal.”

Clyburn said he doesn’t see the same nuance among the most prominent black conservatives today.

Cain said his discussions with other ABC members — which were closed to the media — revolved around “mutual concerns and solutions” for the nation and the black community. In the public news conference, reporters pressed for detail.

“Stay tuned,” Cain said, stepping away from the mikes.


.
.

I will seek that which was lost, and bring again that which was driven away



1 And the word of the Lord came unto me, saying,

2 Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel, prophesy, and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God unto the shepherds; Woe be to the shepherds of Israel that do feed themselves! should not the shepherds feed the flocks?

3 Ye eat the fat, and ye clothe you with the wool, ye kill them that are fed: but ye feed not the flock.

4 The diseased have ye not strengthened, neither have ye healed that which was sick, neither have ye bound up that which was broken, neither have ye brought again that which was driven away, neither have ye sought that which was lost; but with force and with cruelty have ye ruled them.

5 And they were scattered, because there is no shepherd: and they became meat to all the beasts of the field, when they were scattered.

6 My sheep wandered through all the mountains, and upon every high hill: yea, my flock was scattered upon all the face of the earth, and none did search or seek after them.

7 Therefore, ye shepherds, hear the word of the Lord;

8 As I live, saith the Lord God, surely because my flock became a prey, and my flock became meat to every beast of the field, because there was no shepherd, neither did my shepherds search for my flock, but the shepherds fed themselves, and fed not my flock;

9 Therefore, O ye shepherds, hear the word of the Lord;

10 Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I am against the shepherds; and I will require my flock at their hand, and cause them to cease from feeding the flock; neither shall the shepherds feed themselves any more; for I will deliver my flock from their mouth, that they may not be meat for them.

11 For thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I, even I, will both search my sheep, and seek them out.

12 As a shepherd seeketh out his flock in the day that he is among his sheep that are scattered; so will I seek out my sheep, and will deliver them out of all places where they have been scattered in the cloudy and dark day.

13 And I will bring them out from the people, and gather them from the countries, and will bring them to their own land, and feed them upon the mountains of Israel by the rivers, and in all the inhabited places of the country.

14 I will feed them in a good pasture, and upon the high mountains of Israel shall their fold be: there shall they lie in a good fold, and in a fat pasture shall they feed upon the mountains of Israel.

15 I will feed my flock, and I will cause them to lie down, saith the Lord God.

16 I will seek that which was lost, and bring again that which was driven away, and will bind up that which was broken, and will strengthen that which was sick: but I will destroy the fat and the strong; I will feed them with judgment.

17 And as for you, O my flock, thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I judge between cattle and cattle, between the rams and the he goats.

18 Seemeth it a small thing unto you to have eaten up the good pasture, but ye must tread down with your feet the residue of your pastures? and to have drunk of the deep waters, but ye must foul the residue with your feet?

19 And as for my flock, they eat that which ye have trodden with your feet; and they drink that which ye have fouled with your feet.

20 Therefore thus saith the Lord God unto them; Behold, I, even I, will judge between the fat cattle and between the lean cattle.

21 Because ye have thrust with side and with shoulder, and pushed all the diseased with your horns, till ye have scattered them abroad;

22 Therefore will I save my flock, and they shall no more be a prey; and I will judge between cattle and cattle.

23 And I will set up one shepherd over them, and he shall feed them, even my servant David; he shall feed them, and he shall be their shepherd.

24 And I the Lord will be their God, and my servant David a prince among them; I the Lord have spoken it.

25 And I will make with them a covenant of peace, and will cause the evil beasts to cease out of the land: and they shall dwell safely in the wilderness, and sleep in the woods.

26 And I will make them and the places round about my hill a blessing; and I will cause the shower to come down in his season; there shall be showers of blessing.

27 And the tree of the field shall yield her fruit, and the earth shall yield her increase, and they shall be safe in their land, and shall know that I am the Lord, when I have broken the bands of their yoke, and delivered them out of the hand of those that served themselves of them.

28 And they shall no more be a prey to the heathen, neither shall the beast of the land devour them; but they shall dwell safely, and none shall make them afraid.

29 And I will raise up for them a plant of renown, and they shall be no more consumed with hunger in the land, neither bear the shame of the heathen any more.

30 Thus shall they know that I the Lord their God am with them, and that they, even the house of Israel, are my people, saith the Lord God.

31 And ye my flock, the flock of my pasture, are men, and I am your God, saith the Lord God.


Ezekiel 34
King James Version (KJV)

.