asher553: (Default)
Just another fun day in Portland!

I got up bright and early and drove to the shul in the Southwest Portland neighborhood where I used to live. The weather was nice, and we had a good turnout.

After davvening, I headed back home to downtown. Some studying, housecleaning, laundry - and then it was time to head down to the waterfront for today's rally.

I met up with a friend from our political community - she was standing near the great big flag and was easy to spot. We had a good turnout and I think morale was very high.

The folks from the other side were there too, of course - many of them wearing masks, banging on drums, or tooting those noisemaker horns to drown out conversation. And of course there were the obligatory chants of "Nazis go home!"

Today's demo was a logical continuation of the June 4 event. But there were some important differences. The June 4 rally was held at a park, on Federal land. (The Mayor would have liked to deny us a permit, but he has no jurisdiction over Terry Schrunk Plaza, so it wasn't up to him.) The event went well, but it was a bit claustrophobic: we were surrounded by a phalanx of law enforcement keeping us separated from the counter-protestors, who greatly outnumbered us.

This afternoon we met in the open, in public space, at Waterfront Park. There were no battalions of police officers, maybe only one or two cops in sight. And it was not a static rally, but a march - we walked north along the waterfront and back, being seen and heard. So I think in those ways it was a much stronger statement.

And the oppo weren't there in nearly the same numbers as before.

We got maybe a few hundred yards down the waterfront when we had to stop and pull back - the antifas were hitting us with pepper spray, and two or three people went down. Some of our security people served as medics for the affected folks. Eventually we regrouped and kept moving.

I didn't stay for the whole thing because I don't have unlimited endurance for these kinds of things - and I was hot and tired and I've got a job to go to Monday morning. But I was glad I went, and I was very encouraged by the high morale and the sense of momentum. Also I was moved by the number of people who'd made the trip from their homes in the more conservative, rural parts of the state to make an appearance in uber-liberal Portland.

I took a few photos which I'll try to post later. Meanwhile, the Oregonian has a decent write-up on the event, with lots of photos.
asher553: (Default)
I haven't been following the McMaster story closely, and I like to be careful in forming my opinions. So as a balance to the Caroline Glick article I posted earlier (previous post on DW / LJ), here is a Twitter link to Mark Dubowitz, which comes to me by way of Lee Smith. Dubowitz asserts that, contrary to the view of Caroline Glick and some others, McMaster has a very solid record of being tough against Iran and a strong supporter of Israel.

Also (via a friend's comment at FB), here's a series of YouTube links to a recent interview with McMaster.
asher553: (Default)

'The Israel angle on McMaster’s purge of Trump loyalists from the National Security Council is that all of these people are pro-Israel and oppose the Iran nuclear deal, positions that Trump holds.

McMaster in contrast is deeply hostile to Israel and to Trump. According to senior officials aware of his behavior, he constantly refers to Israel as the occupying power and insists falsely and constantly that a country named Palestine existed where Israel is located until 1948 when it was destroyed by the Jews.

Many of you will remember that a few days before Trump’s visit to Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – בנימין נתניהו and his advisers were blindsided when the Americans suddenly told them that no Israeli official was allowed to accompany Trump to the Western Wall.

What hasn’t been reported is that it was McMaster who pressured Trump to agree not to let Netanyahu accompany him to the Western Wall. At the time, I and other reporters were led to believe that this was the decision of rogue anti-Israel officers at the US consulate in Jerusalem. But it wasn’t. It was McMaster. ...'
asher553: (Default)
Helen Church, Kathryn Townsend, and my friend Athena Brown are the subjects of this refreshingly fair piece at PBS, which covers the June 4 rally in Portland.

'Some are extremists. Others hold more moderate views. Still others are hard to pin down. They include independent voters like Townsend, who are becoming more active and strident as they see unprecedented efforts on the left to shut conversations down. They include people like Church, who, when slapped with labels, respond by showing up at rallies for the first time. And they include Republicans like Brown who have become fed up with what they see as the left’s PC culture. ...'

Go read the whole thing at the link.
asher553: (Default)
Maybe you think my religion is stupid. That's fine - sometimes I think my religion is stupid too.

I like being free to explore, question, and re-affirm my beliefs from one day to the next. I love being able to discuss and debate these things with others without fear. One of the great achievements of Western civilization has been the creation of a broad cultural consensus, enshrined in law but deeply rooted in hard-won social norms, that makes possible the free and open discussion of matters of faith without fear of reprisal or persecution.

We are in danger of losing this.

No one will be burned at the stake or imprisoned for attacking Christianity in any Western country. Well and good. But today's self-styled "liberals" who are so proud of their indifference to Jewish and Christian doctrine will bend over backwards to defend Islam against any perceived slight, and to smear and silence those who critique the Muslim faith.

I am under no moral obligation to have a good opinion of Islam, and I don't. Maybe I'm wrong, and you're certainly welcome to debate me on the matter; but I reserve the right to form my own opinion. That doesn't mean that I'm blind to the fact that there are people who are fine, beautiful human beings, and also devout Muslims. It does mean that I'm capable of judging individual human beings by their character - and also of forming judgments about the belief systems that influence the behavior of millions of people.

On my coffee table at this very moment sits a slim, attractively bound paperback titled 'Tolerance: The Beacon of the Enlightenment'. Edited and translated by Caroline Warman and others, it's an anthology of the founding texts of the European Enlightenment.

The book was conceived and produced in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo murders as a tribute to the highest ideals of the French Republic. A far nobler and more constructive gesture than lighting candles and posting "Je Suis Charlie" on social media - and yet, still tragic. Because in the end, the jihadis unequivocally won. Charlie Hebdo continued publishing, but never again dared incur Muslim wrath with cartoons of Mohammed.

"Can Islam be reformed?" This is a question asked by many well-meaning Westerners. Personally I think it is only answerable by the Muslim world as a whole. Whether Muslims "reform" their religion or abandon it altogether is of no concern to me; what I care about is the practical outcome.

I do not entirely understand the solicitude of Western non-Muslim liberals for the well-being of Islam. They want to defend it from criticism and even save it from itself. It's almost as if, having abandoned church and synagogue themselves, they remain in the grip of an unacknowledged craving for religion.

What I do know is that I care about my relationship with the Creator and with the sacred tradition that I (however imperfectly) follow. I care about the freedom to use my gift of reason to investigate the meaning of the Scriptures and the findings of science. I care about living in a world where people treat one another with the kindness and dignity befitting beings made in the image of G-d.
asher553: (Default)
So, I went to this last Sunday.

Short version first: It was an amazing experience. I saw Andy there, and finally got to meet Athena and Leo and a number of other local people that I'd only interacted with online. Marco and Harim came up from Cali and I got my picture taken with Harim. A street preacher talked about sin and forgiveness, and a trans activist stomped on a communist flag. This big, friendly Polynesian guy named Tiny started the whole thing off with a warrior dance.

The folks on the other side tried to make trouble for us, but they didn't even make a dent. The Portland police did a good job of keeping order. I had been a bit apprehensive about the event, and didn't decide until the last minute that I was going to go at all. But it was incredible, energizing, and a great chance to build bonds with people I hadn't met before but needed to.

I've already posted (without much context) a few pictures from the event. I'll have more to say soon, both about the rally itself and events leading up to it. But I've had a super busy day and I need to be turning in soon.
asher553: (Default)
I try to avoid approaching debates from a partisan perspective, i.e. "You Democrats such-and-such", for purely tactical reasons. People form attachments to their party, no matter if it's a stupid party (like the Democrats) or a slightly less stupid party (like the Republicans). Attack the party and you're attacking them, and quite naturally they respond accordingly; you won't get any reasoned persuasion done in such a conversation. The same goes for Presidents - if he's "your President", he represents you. (I don't think people usually form the same relationship with lower level officials, unless it's an especially charismatic person.)

Generally, too, I find it's better not to over-argue - just present the facts, and let the other person draw their own conclusions. People like to make up their own minds, and they trust an idea more if they've come to it themselves.

Very rarely will I get into a direct, point/counterpoint - type debate. I only do these if I know I'm on solid factual and logical ground, and that I can demonstrate to the other person where their information or their reasoning is faulty. But those cases are few and far between - very much the exception to the rule.

September 2017

345 6 789
17 1819 20212223


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated 2017-09-25 18:47
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios