Park Service films Islamic contributions to women's rights ... despite sequestration

[NightHawkeye]

Yes, the National Park Service Really Made Videos Showcasing What They Say Are Islam’s Contributions to Women’s Rights | Video | TheBlaze.com

The National Park Service (NPS) created a series of videos last month highlighting Islam’s contributions to women’s rights.
...
In March, the NPS said they were preparing to open road later, close visitor centers, furlough park police and hire fewer seasonal workers to meet the 5% sequestration budget cuts mandated by Congress and President Obama, according to USA Today.

​

 

[conamer]

So they now work for CAIR.

 

[stamperben]

You're not being clear enough for me to understand what point you are trying to make here...

Is it that the NPS is continuing it's work - despite the sequestration?

Or is it that in celebrating women's rights they bring up a religion that isn't yours?

 

[NightHawkeye]

So they now work for CAIR.

LOL ... they certainly seem to be doing CAIR's work.

 

[Bedford]

The intern, Sofia Brewer-Berres that developed the tolerance videos was paid by the Friends of Women's Rights National Historical Park.

sequestration?

 

[stamperben]

The intern, Sofia Brewer-Berres that developed the tolerance videos was paid by the Friends of Women's Rights National Historical Park.
​

sequestration?

What? You mean a little investigative clicking of a mouse brought out some facts? You ought to work for the Blaze!

Oh, wait. They wouldn't stand for that sort of stuff...
Never mind.

 

[Bedford]

What? You mean a little investigative clicking of a mouse brought out some facts? You ought to work for the Blaze!

Oh, wait. They wouldn't stand for that sort of stuff...
Never mind.

To be fair, the Blaze never mentioned sequestration, that was the OP.

 

[stamperben]

To be fair, the Blaze never mentioned sequestration, that was the OP.

Lesson to be learned here...

Maybe.

 

[1Feather]

To be fair, the Blaze never mentioned sequestration, that was the OP.

From The Blaze Article:

In March, the NPS said they were preparing to open road later, close visitor centers, furlough park police and hire fewer seasonal workers to meet the 5% sequestration budget cuts mandated by Congress and President Obama, according to USA Today.

 

[Bedford]

From The Blaze Article:

So what? That comment has nothing to do with these videos in the context trying to be presented by the OP.

If the Blaze is trying to, then it is just one more reason to not read anything from them.

 

[1Feather]

Originally Posted by Bedford

To be fair, the Blaze never mentioned sequestration, that was the OP.
​

That comment was in The Blaze article that contained these videos. Your statement that The Blaze article never mentioned sequestration was therefore wrong. And an indication that, as one may freely infer, you never read the Blaze article else you would have never said that.

 

[stamperben]

This could be easily cleared up by an answer to the following post...

You're not being clear enough for me to understand what point you are trying to make here...

Is it that the NPS is continuing it's work - despite the sequestration?

Or is it that in celebrating women's rights they bring up a religion that isn't yours?

 

[Bedford]

That comment was in The Blaze article that contained these videos.

Do you have a point? Their context is not the same as in the OP, and these videos were paid for by a private non-profit, not the government.

 

[1Feather]

Sucks to be proven wrong doesn't it?

 

[Bedford]

Sucks to be proven wrong doesn't it?

You proved nothing here. The OP is trying to say the Park Service filmed Islamic contributions to women's rights, despite sequestration - which is saying despite cuts the government is paying to have films about Islamic contributions. I proved that the Park Service never paid for these, so the comment about sequestration by the OP is moot, and the Blaze article is misleading and as dishonest as many of their other stories.

Please try to follow the discussion.

 

[stamperben]

Please try to follow the discussion.

Sucks to have to do that...

 

[grasping the after wind]

Do you have a point? Their context is not the same as in the OP, and these videos were paid for by a private non-profit, not the government.

I did not read the article, but the quote from the article mentioned only that an intern was paid for by the private non profit . Is there any evidence that the videos were paid for by the private non profit and if they were or were not, what legitimate role does the Park Service have in the production of this video and was no taxpayer money spent by the Park Service to contribute to this video? Additionally, if there was taxpayer money spent on a video about a particular religion , does that violate the Constitution and were actual Park Service functions( presumably functions that had at least some vague connection to the upkeep of our National Parks) curtailed or truncated by not having access to the taxpayer money spent upon this video?

 

[NightHawkeye]

You proved nothing here. The OP is trying to say the Park Service filmed Islamic contributions to women's rights, despite sequestration - which is saying despite cuts the government is paying to have films about Islamic contributions. I proved that the Park Service never paid for these, so the comment about sequestration by the OP is moot, and the Blaze article is misleading and as dishonest as many of their other stories.

Please try to follow the discussion.

LOL ... can't say they didn't try to get the Park Service perspective first: Yes, the National Park Service Really Made Videos Showcasing What They Say Are Islam’s Contributions to Women’s Rights | Video | TheBlaze.com

A spokesperson for the NPS did not immediately return calls from TheBlaze seeking comment on Saturday.
​

 

[Bedford]

I did not read the article, but the quote from the article mentioned only that an intern was paid for by the private non profit . Is there any evidence that the videos were paid for by the private non profit and if they were or were not, what legitimate role does the Park Service have in the production of this video and was no taxpayer money spent by the Park Service to contribute to this video? Additionally, if there was taxpayer money spent on a video about a particular religion , does that violate the Constitution and were actual Park Service functions( presumably functions that had at least some vague connection to the upkeep of our National Parks) curtailed or truncated by not having access to the taxpayer money spent upon this video?

“In an effort to highlight these struggles for rights, Women’s Rights National Historical Park created a video series to recognize the efforts of citizens to change the world in which they live,”

Sofia Brewer-Berres filmed, edited and produced the 3 films, and she was paid by the Women's Rights National Historical Park.

 

[Bedford]

I did not read the article, but the quote from the article mentioned only that an intern was paid for by the private non profit . Is there any evidence that the videos were paid for by the private non profit and if they were or were not, what legitimate role does the Park Service have in the production of this video and was no taxpayer money spent by the Park Service to contribute to this video? Additionally, if there was taxpayer money spent on a video about a particular religion , does that violate the Constitution and were actual Park Service functions( presumably functions that had at least some vague connection to the upkeep of our National Parks) curtailed or truncated by not having access to the taxpayer money spent upon this video?

BTW, the video's do not promote a religion.