Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MJ who wrote (66353)	6/6/2009 11:38:31 AM
From: TideGlider	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224729

Excellent post MJ!

To: MJ who wrote (66353)	6/6/2009 4:59:05 PM
From: lorne	1 Recommendation Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 224729

All topics open to discuss – except Obama eligibility 100% of posts scrubbed from White House transparency site ask about birth certificate June 06, 2009 By Drew Zahn © 2009 WorldNetDaily wnd.com When it comes to evaluating and discussing transparency in government, one issue – and one issue alone – has been deemed out of bounds by a White House website: President Obama's continued concealment of his birth record. As WND reported, the Obama administration's Office of Science & Technology launched the online forum to allow Americans to discuss ways of creating an "open government," which in turn resulted in a flood of people seeking disclosure of Obama's proof of eligibility to serve as president. As part of the forum's rules and guidelines, posts that are obscene or reveal personal information, like Social Security numbers, are scrubbed completely, while those that are deemed off-topic are removed to a separate archive. But a quick survey of flagged, removed and archived posts from yesterday reveals 100 percent of those yanked for being off-topic were, in fact, on the same topic. The Open Government Initiative's online forum contains 21 entries deleted yesterday, all of them submitted to the thread on "Transparency Principles" and all of them discussing Obama's birth records, including a comment from WND's Chelsea Schilling. One user, Jason Roberts, expressed his concerns on the forum about the White House hosting a "transparency" discussion without properly addressing the eligibility topic. "The fact that the birth certificate issue hasn't been resolved, precludes any possible discussion of government transparency," Roberts wrote. "It is a farce to sit with hands folded and pretend to have some self-righteous discussion about government transparency when Mr. Obama is refusing to be transparent about his birth certificate, passport records, and school records. If his presidency started with his being sworn in, then the transparency must start with him willingly releasing his long-form birth certificate." Are you motivated yet to join the billboard campaign and clear up the air of mystery surrounding Barack Obama's constitutional eligibility to serve? Roberts continued, "This issue will never go away. It will be there, stoked and kept fresh daily, for 8 years if necessary, until it is addressed. And the one to blame is Obama." Comments not scrubbed from the site for being off-topic include the following: A man's detailing of his full-body rash and medical problems – prompting four additional comments on Lyme disease – on a thread devoted to the proper qualifications for presidential appointees to science posts A claim on the thread dedicated to scientific integrity within the OSTP that Americans are being "covertly assaulted" with secret energy weapons and then accused of being paranoid or mentally ill A pair of posts advocating more widespread use of marijuana in a discussion thread on government whistleblowers. Despite the removal and archiving of posts related to Obama's birth certificate, however, the discussion continues to be dominated by questions of Obama's qualifications to serve as president. One commenter, Dave Jamieson, wrote this afternoon that "in order to assure the people who are participating on this site that true honesty and transparency will be the highest goal," three things need to be done. Jamieson demanded the website first, "Be truthful in declaring that the highest-rated number of posts and votes in the idea gathering phase of this project were in regards to Obama's eligibility;" second, "Send a verifiable message to the White House declaring the results of phase 1 as shown above;" and third, "Ask the White House to release all applicable documents proving Obama's eligibility." He concluded, "Then and only then will you garner respect from all the participants of this website for the truthfulness of what you have said you are trying to do." Jamieson's comments may have reflected a statement WND reported earlier made by Beth Noveck, White House deputy chief technology officer for open government, on the White House website: "We read and considered all the proposals," Noveck said in the statement. "We took the voting into account when assessing your enthusiasm for a submission, but only somewhat in evaluating relevance." She continued, "The ideas that received the most organized support were not necessarily the most viable suggestions." In addition to WND's consistent coverage of the still unanswered questions surrounding Obama's eligibility, the topic has also hit Twitter, with numerous tweeters encouraging readers to keep the issue alive at the open government website. Meanwhile, Fox News has launched a new forum asking the public, "What would you write Obama?" It asks readers to share funny messages they would send to the president's blackberry and how Obama might reply. Fox News will feature the top five conversations next week.

To: MJ who wrote (66353)	6/6/2009 7:38:51 PM
From: lorne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224729

President Obama to American Muslims: I will ease the impact of post-9/11 scrutiny of charities BY Michael Saul DAILY NEWS POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT Friday, June 5th 2009 nydailynews.com Tucked away in President Obama's historic speech in Cairo Thursday was a promise to American Muslims to ease the impact of post-9/11 scrutiny of their charities. "Rules on charitable giving have made it harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation. That's why I'm committed to working with American Muslims to ensure that they can fulfill zakat," said Obama, referring to the Muslim obligation to be charitable. A Treasury Department spokeswoman, Natalie Wyeth, described an increased effort to talk with the groups, to "help them protect against terrorist abuse of charity and to refine the guidance surrounding charitable giving." Ever since the World Trade Center attacks, fund-raising by American Muslims has come under repeated federal investigations for possible support of terrorism. Just last week, a federal judge in Dallas sentenced five leaders of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development to between 15 and 65 years in prison after they were convicted of providing material support to Hamas. American Muslims complain legitimate philanthropy has been hampered because the rules are ill-defined. "The perception that giving to charities is financing terrorism has to be debunked," said Salam Al-Marayati, executive director of the Muslim Public Affairs Council. "It hurts America." "There's no public notice of who you can and can't do business with," said Kay Guinane, who is leading an effort on the issue for OMB Watch, a good-government group. "It's created a tremendous climate of fear," she said. "Donors are afraid they may be prosecuted for giving to an organization now that may be declared a supporter of terrorism two years from now." "We need long-term sensible laws in this area," she concluded, "and that's why I was so happy to hear that that the President recognizes that there is a problem and is committed to doing something about it."