February, 26 2009, 11:58am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Rick Jauert
202.225.4755
Ellison Expresses Concern and Disappointment with Decision to Screen Anti-Islamic Film
Takes Issue with sponsorship of film by Senator Kyl
WASHINGTON
Congressman Keith Ellison (D-MN) took issue with the screening of a film by the controversial Dutch Parliamentarian, Geert Wilders, in the United States Capitol. The film being screened, "Fitna", is said to compare Islamic terrorism to Nazism. The screening is sponsored by Senator John Kyl (R-AZ).
"I am a strong an advocate of First Amendment free speech. However, this is not about free speech, but rather an issue of propriety, timing and venue," Ellison said. "Senator Kyl has every right to host anyone he chooses, however it becomes a question of propriety to use the United States Capitol as a venue for the condemnation of an entire religion," Ellison said.
Mr. Wilders was denied entry by the British government because of his extremist views. A British Home Office spokesman stated: "The government opposes extremism in all its forms." The Dutch government has disavowed Mr. Wilders visit to this country and believes the release of this film "serves no purpose other than to cause offence." According to the London Telegraph, Wilders has stated that the Qu'ran should be banned.
Ellison further stated, "At a time when President Obama has said to the Muslim world, 'We are ready to initiate a new partnership based on mutual respect and mutual interest,' the showing of a film that denigrates the faith of 1.4 billion of the world's citizens does not foster mutual respect or mutual interest.
At a time when the US should be providing renewed leadership for peace and more understanding between the west and the Muslim world, one has to question the wisdom and judgment of promoting a film that erroneously condemns an entire religion-especially in the US Capitol," Ellison concluded.
LATEST NEWS
1 Million Acres Burned by Texas Smokehouse Creek Fire
Experts say the Smokehouse Creek fire is a vision of what the climate crisis has in store for the world.
Mar 04, 2024
Climate experts are warning that the Smokehouse Creek fire in the Texas panhandle—now the largest in the state's history with over over 1 million acres burned and counting—provides a horrifying look into a future of runaway temperatures that result in extreme destruction.
The fire is currently only 15% contained, but firefighters said Sunday they are hoping an approaching cold front will help them bring it under control. It's not clear what started the fire, but high temperatures, dry conditions, and strong winds have fueled it. Wind speeds have reached over 50 miles per hour.
President Joe Biden was at the Texas border on Thursday and criticized climate deniers who don't believe the climate crisis is contributing to these fires.
Climate change is contributing to the conditions that are making the fire so destructive, and more fires like this one are likely in the future. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) posted on Sunday about the need to fight the climate crisis to help reduce the frequency of these kinds of natural disasters.
We are in the middle of a climate crisis. We cannot sit back as these tragedies, like the devastating wildfires in Texas, become more frequent and more widespread. We must act. pic.twitter.com/ie6CC8ybxd
— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) March 4, 2024
Writing in the New York Times over the weekend, journalist John Vaillant, author of the award-winning "Fire Weather: a True Story From a Hotter World," argued that the recent scenes from Texas represent a "terrifying" preview of what's to come—not just in Texas or any one place—but across the world. According to Vaillant:
It is alarming to see these fires and warnings in what is supposed to be the dead of winter, but fire, as distracting and dangerous as it is, is merely one symptom. What is happening in North America is not a regional aberration; it’s part of a global departure, what climate scientists call a phase shift. The past year has seen virtually every metric of planetary distress lurch into uncharted territory: sea surface temperature, air temperature, polar ice loss, fire intensity — you name it, it is off the charts.
At least two people have died from the Texas fire, and approximately 500 homes and businesses have been destroyed. Thousands of cattle have also died because of the fire.
"There's a lot of fuel on the ground," Texas A&M Forest Service spokesperson Jason Nedlo told CNN. "When you add high winds and low humidity to high fuel load levels, that's when you get the conditions that are ripe for large, fast-burning wildfires."
Climate scientists have been have been warning that the Smokehouse Creek fire is a vision of what's to come if the world doesn't address the climate crisis. A United Nations report from 2022 claimed that wildfires could increase by 30% by the year 2050.
The official wildfire season in Texas doesn't start until April, but with 2024 expected to be the hottest year since records began, experts predict such seasons will start earlier and generate larger and more numerous fires in regions across the world.
In his piece for the Times, Vaillant equated the growing wildfire threat to metaphorical dragons moving in on human and animal populations from the horizon.
"My earnest advice is to listen to climate scientists, to meteorologists, to fire officials," he concluded. "They are trying to save your lives. And if you see fire on the horizon, don’t fixate on the flames; pay attention to the wind. If it's blowing toward you, the embers are, too, and you better get ready to go."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Disgraceful' Supreme Court Hands Victory to Trump in 14th Amendment Case
The 9-0 ruling which reverses a decision by the Colorado Supreme Court, warned one pro-democracy watchdog, "undermines the integrity of our Constitution and emboldens those seeking to disrupt and dismantle our democratic systems."
Mar 04, 2024
The U.S. Supreme Court delivered Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump a resounding legal victory on Monday by rejecting a push by Colorado voters to have him disqualified from the state's ballot under a clause of the 14th Amendment on the grounds that the former president was guilty of insurrection due to his actions leading up to and on January 6, 2021.
Though the Colorado Supreme Court last year ruled in favor of the argument to exclude Trump in this year's election, Monday's 9-0 ruling said, "Because the Constitution makes Congress, rather than the States, responsible for enforcing Section 3 [of the 14th Amendment] against federal officeholders and candidates, we reverse."
The decision by the nation's highest court was unanimous, though Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elana Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson—the three remaining liberals on the Court—signed a concurring opinion in the judgment, indicating a varied reason for supporting the underlying decision. In addition to Colorado, officials in Maine and Illinois have moved to remove Trump from the ballot.
"The Supreme Court couldn't exonerate Trump because the evidence of his guilt was overwhelming, so instead the Justices neutered our Constitution's built-in defense against insurrectionists and said the facts don't matter."
Supporters of the effort to disqualify Trump from seeking public office due to his insurrectionary words and deeds following his loss in the 2020 election, which he refused to accept, condemned Monday's ruling.
"This decision is disgraceful," said Ron Fein, legal director of Free Speech For People (FSFP), which pioneered the first litigation under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment and co-led the successful Illinois challenge. "The Supreme Court couldn't exonerate Trump because the evidence of his guilt was overwhelming, so instead the Justices neutered our Constitution's built-in defense against insurrectionists and said the facts don't matter."
Legal experts said the ruling did not hinge on the question of whether or not Trump was, in fact, guilty of insurrection but only that Colorado was not qualified to invoke the 14th Amendment.
"Yes, the Supreme Court ruled for Trump based on only Congress having the power to enforce the 14th amendment," said Norm Eisen, senior fellow at the Brookings Institute and an outspoken Trump critic. "But just as important as what they did is what they didn't do. They did not expressly challenge that he was an insurrectionist—and the concurrence emphasizes that finding."
Nonetheless, Common Cause called the ruling a "major setback for democracy" that sets a worrying precedent.
"This decision undermines the integrity of our Constitution and emboldens those seeking to disrupt and dismantle our democratic systems. For over 200 years, all but one of our leaders have abided by the Constitution and practiced the peaceful transfer of power," said Kathay Feng, the group's vice president of programs.
"This ruling reverses the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision, and with it, green lights future presidents to intimidate, threaten, and attack Congress into obedience," Feng added. "Our Constitution depends on checks and balances. Removing states as a check on tyrannical presidents threatens the future of our democracy."
In its statement, FSFP similarly said the ruling was "dangerous" as it "encourages Trump–and those who follow his example–to engage in more insurrections and disregard more broadly the Constitution."
"As one Senator explained in 1866 when advocating for Section 3, 'the man who has once violated his oath will be more liable to violate his fealty to the Government in the future,'" the group noted. "The framers of the Fourteenth Amendment learned this lesson in blood, and gave us Section 3 to prevent a repeat. With today's ruling, the Supreme Court has utterly failed in its duty to uphold this constitutional mandate at this critical moment in history."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Starvation Is Taking Place': Sanders Demands Biden Cut Off All Military Aid to Israel
The independent Senator said arming a nation that is actively "prohibiting aid convoys from delivering desperately needed food and water" represents a clear violation of U.S. law.
Mar 04, 2024
Sen. Bernie Sanders on Sunday accused Israel of standing in clear violation of the U.S. Foreign Assistance Act by creating the conditions for mass starvation within the Gaza Strip as he called on the Biden administration to halt all military aid to the country until Palestinians are granted the life-saving humanitarian relief they urgently need.
"Starvation is taking place in Gaza," Sanders said in a statement. "Israel is prohibiting aid convoys from delivering desperately needed food and water."
While the U.S. government initiated airdrops over the weekend with the aim of providing tens of thousands of meals for those starving and suffering malnutrition in the besieged territory of Gaza, relief agencies said the effort was only a drop in the bucket of what is needed to stem what the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) on Sunday called a "hell on earth" situation.
Sanders on Friday was supportive of airdrops—an effort he said would "buy time and save lives"—but added that "there is no substitute for sustained ground deliveries of what is needed to sustain life in Gaza."
The government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, said Sanders, "must open the borders and allow the United Nations to deliver supplies in sufficient quantities. The United States should make clear that failure to do so immediately will lead to a fundamental break in the U.S.-Israeli relationship and the immediate halt of all military aid."
On Sunday, as Common Dreams reported, UNICEF issued a warning to the world that ten child deaths from starvation had already been documented, that others had likely occurred, and many more should be expected if conditions on the ground were not immediately addressed.
"Horrific reports confirmed that, over the last few days only, at least 10 children died of malnutrition in Gaza," the agency said. "These deaths are man-made, predictable, and entirely preventable."
Agnes Callamard, secretary-general of Amnesty International, called the situation in Gaza an "engineered famine" created by Israel and its international allies who have stood aside or provided backing to Netanyahu.
U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris on Sunda all pressed the Israelis to increase military aid as she pressed by both Netanyahu and Hamas leaders to accept a cease-fire deal.
"People in Gaza are starving," Harris said during an event in Alabama. "The conditions are inhumane and our common humanity compels us to act."
"The Israeli government must do more to significantly increase the flow of aid. No excuses," she added, but notably did not say what, if any, consequences the Israelis would face from the White House if they refused.
As Sanders' office noted in its Sunday statement, Israel's ongoing blockade of food, water, medical supplies, and fuel as the civilian population suffers at such levels is a clear violation of Section 620I of the Foreign Assistance Act, which states:
No assistance shall be furnished … to any country when it is made known to the President that the government of such country prohibits or otherwise restricts, directly or indirectly, the transport or delivery of United States humanitarian assistance.
"Today," said Sanders, "I urge President Biden to implement this law and make it clear to Israel that, if aid access is not immediately opened up, he will impose consequences under the Foreign Assistance Act and stop military assistance to Israel."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular