transcript: Obama remarks at National Prayer Breakfast

As released by the White House / Office of the press Secretary on 5th February 2009, these are the remarks (as prepared for delivery) by president Barack Obama at the National Prayer Breakfast.

Good morning. I want to thank the Co-Chairs of this breakfast,
Representatives Heath Shuler and Vernon Ehlers. I'd also like to thank Tony
Blair for coming today, as well as our Vice President, Joe Biden, members of
my Cabinet, members of Congress, clergy, friends, and dignitaries from
across the world.

Michelle and I are honored to join you in prayer this morning. I know this
breakfast has a long history in Washington, and faith has always been a
guiding force in our family's life, so we feel very much at home and look
forward to keeping this tradition alive during our time here.

It's a tradition that I'm told actually began many years ago in the city of
Seattle. It was the height of the Great Depression, and most people found themselves out of work. Many fell into poverty. Some lost everything.

The leaders of the community did all that they could for those who were
suffering in their midst. And then they decided to do something more: they
prayed. It didn't matter what party or religious affiliation to which they
belonged. They simply gathered one morning as brothers and sisters to share
a meal and talk with God.

These breakfasts soon sprouted up throughout Seattle, and quickly spread to
cities and towns across America, eventually making their way to Washington.
A short time after President Eisenhower asked a group of Senators if he
could join their prayer breakfast, it became a national event. And today,
as I see presidents and dignitaries here from every corner of the globe, it
strikes me that this is one of the rare occasions that still brings much of
the world together in a moment of peace and goodwill.

I raise this history because far too often, we have seen faith wielded as a
tool to divide us from one another - as an excuse for prejudice and
intolerance. Wars have been waged. Innocents have been slaughtered. For
centuries, entire religions have been persecuted, all in the name of
perceived righteousness.

There is no doubt that the very nature of faith means that some of our
beliefs will never be the same. We read from different texts. We follow
different edicts. We subscribe to different accounts of how we came to be
here and where we're going next - and some subscribe to no faith at all.

But no matter what we choose to believe, let us remember that there is no
religion whose central tenet is hate. There is no God who condones taking
the life of an innocent human being. This much we know.

We know too that whatever our differences, there is one law that binds all
great religions together. Jesus told us to "love thy neighbor as thyself."
The Torah commands, "That which is hateful to you, do not do to your
fellow." In Islam, there is a hadith that reads "None of you truly believes
until he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself." And the same
is true for Buddhists and Hindus; for followers of Confucius and for
humanists. It is, of course, the Golden Rule - the call to love one
another; to understand one another; to treat with dignity and respect those
with whom we share a brief moment on this Earth.

It is an ancient rule; a simple rule; but also one of the most challenging.
For it asks each of us to take some measure of responsibility for the
well-being of people we may not know or worship with or agree with on every
issue. Sometimes, it asks us to reconcile with bitter enemies or resolve
ancient hatreds. And that requires a living, breathing, active faith. It
requires us not only to believe, but to do - to give something of ourselves
for the benefit of others and the betterment of our world.

In this way, the particular faith that motivates each of us can promote a
greater good for all of us. Instead of driving us apart, our varied beliefs
can bring us together to feed the hungry and comfort the afflicted; to make
peace where there is strife and rebuild what has broken; to lift up those
who have fallen on hard times. This is not only our call as people of
faith, but our duty as citizens of America, and it will be the purpose of
the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships that I'm
announcing later today.

The goal of this office will not be to favor one religious group over
another - or even religious groups over secular groups. It will simply be
to work on behalf of those organizations that want to work on behalf of our
communities, and to do so without blurring the line that our founders wisely
drew between church and state. This work is important, because whether it's
a secular group advising families facing foreclosure or faith-based groups
providing job-training to those who need work, few are closer to what's
happening on our streets and in our neighborhoods than these organizations.
People trust them. Communities rely on them. And we will help them.

We will also reach out to leaders and scholars around the world to foster a
more productive and peaceful dialogue on faith. I don't expect divisions to
disappear overnight, nor do I believe that long-held views and conflicts
will suddenly vanish. But I do believe that if we can talk to one another
openly and honestly, then perhaps old rifts will start to mend and new
partnerships will begin to emerge. In a world that grows smaller by the
day, perhaps we can begin to crowd out the destructive forces of zealotry
and make room for the healing power of understanding.

This is my hope. This is my prayer.

I believe this good is possible because my faith teaches me that all is
possible, but I also believe because of what I have seen and what I have
lived.

I was not raised in a particularly religious household. I had a father who
was born a Muslim but became an atheist, grandparents who were
non-practicing Methodists and Baptists, and a mother who was skeptical of
organized religion, even as she was the kindest, most spiritual person I've
ever known. She was the one who taught me as a child to love, and to
understand, and to do unto others as I would want done.

I didn't become a Christian until many years later, when I moved to the
South Side of Chicago after college. It happened not because of
indoctrination or a sudden revelation, but because I spent month after month
working with church folks who simply wanted to help neighbors who were down
on their luck - no matter what they looked like, or where they came from, or
who they prayed to. It was on those streets, in those neighborhoods, that I
first heard God's spirit beckon me. It was there that I felt called to a
higher purpose - His purpose.

In different ways and different forms, it is that spirit and sense of
purpose that drew friends and neighbors to that first prayer breakfast in
Seattle all those years ago, during another trying time for our nation. It
is what led friends and neighbors from so many faiths and nations here
today. We come to break bread and give thanks and seek guidance, but also
to rededicate ourselves to the mission of love and service that lies at the
heart of all humanity. As St. Augustine once said, "Pray as though
everything depended on God. Work as though everything depended on you."

So let us pray together on this February morning, but let us also work
together in all the days and months ahead. For it is only through common
struggle and common effort, as brothers and sisters, that we fulfill our
highest purpose as beloved children of God. I ask you to join me in that
effort, and I also ask that you pray for me, for my family, and for the
continued perfection of our union. Thank you.

The transcript will also eventually be posted at the White House site, in the meantime here is a PDF from USA Today.

PostSecret: burka and bikini

Related: The Burka and the Bikini at City of Brass (Beliefnet)

Yom Kippur

Today is Yom Kippur, the Jewish Day of Atonement. I find some interesting parallels to Islam.

Obama McCain Debate II: the best question

At City of Brass, I discuss the best question of last night's debate: asking Americans to sacrifice.

5th Annual Brass Crescent Awards

The 5th Annual Brass Crescent Awards are now underway!

More details at City of Brass...

Dayton mosque attack incident revisited

New details have emerged about the Dayton mosque incident. I explore them in detail at City of Brass v2.0.

(sorry no RSS feed for the new site is available yet. I am leaning on my editors to get me one soon. Please stay tuned :)

The fiscal crisis explained by stick figures

at City of Brass v2.0, with added commentary on the relevance to Islamic banking.

Patience, patience

It's been a couple of weeks now at my new home for City of Brass at Beliefnet, and while I've largely settled into a new routine there, several things remain unfinished. First among these is my RSS feed, which still has not been activated. I ask your patience. In the meantime, why not take a look at the blog the old fashioned way? I really have been quite a lot more active these past two weeks.

City of Brass v2.0 now live at Beliefnet

It's official - City of Brass will henceforth be published at Beliefnet - the URL to the new blog is:

http://blog.beliefnet.com/cityofbrass/

Please join me over there, and update your bookmarks accordingly!

Announcement

I am pleased and honored to announce that I have been invited to move City of Brass to BeliefNet.com. Effective next week, I will be posting at my new URL (http://blog.beliefnet.com/cityofbrass/ - but don't go yet, there's not much there at present). If you are subscribed to my feed, you needn't change anything, you should be redirected automatically.

I am really excited about this opportunity and I think that it will be a lot of fun. See you over there!

Obama's muslim-outreach advisor resigns

Chalk up another victory for the scalp-hunting Islamophobe right: Mazen Asbahi, appointed as national coordinator for Muslim American affairs by the Obama campaign, has resigned from his volunteer position because of claims that he has "ties" to the Muslim Brotherhood, and served on the board of advisors for an Islamic fund at the same time (8 years ago) as another member, Jamal Said who is a fundamentalist imam. Asbahi actually resigned from that position after only a few weeks, once he learned of allegations against Said. In other words, Asbahi got the jihadi cooties, which are kind of like a mixture of anthrax and herpes.

Obama continues to disappoint on this score. He still remains unable to state publicly that "no, I am not a muslim but it would make no difference even if I were." It would have truly been a hope-inspiring change to see him defend Asbahi and take on the whisperers, because caving to them makes them all the stronger. That would be audacity I can believe in.

Yes, 12% of voters still think Obama is muslim (incidentally, 1% think he's Jewish). So whats the better strategy? Try to distance yourself from muslims at all costs to try and make that 12% think, "hmm. ok so he threw his volunteer outreach guy under the bus. I'm convinced!" ? Or to try and undermine the reasoning that says "if Obama is muslim, then I cannot vote for him, because muslims are not acceptable" ?

If any politician had the power or the pulpit to take on the ugly, dark side of American culture that Islamophobia represents, it's Obama. Given the confluence of events of war and energy and security, a sane outreach to Islam is in our collective best interest. Yet Obama runs away. Again.

I'm not sure whether I have any substantive analysis here other than snark, so I'll just stop here. Some excerpts from the story at WSJ:

why even have a muslim outreach advisor?

Until Mr. Asbahi joined the campaign, Sen. Obama did not have a Muslim-outreach coordinator and had relied on the Democratic National Committee's efforts. The campaign has long had its own outreach efforts to Catholic, evangelical Christian and Jewish voters. Some Muslim voters have complained about the disparity. An Obama aide says Mr. Asbahi was brought on in part to bridge that perceived gap and to reach out to Muslim communities in Florida, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia, states seen as among the most competitive this fall.

What exactly are these "ties" to extremism?

In 2000, Mr. Asbahi briefly served on the board of Allied Assets Advisors Fund, a Delaware-registered trust. Its other board members at the time included Jamal Said, the imam at a fundamentalist-controlled mosque in Illinois.
[faith and obama]

"I served on that board for only a few weeks before resigning as soon as I became aware of public allegations against another member of the board," Mr. Asbahi said in his resignation letter. "Since concerns have been raised about that brief time, I am stepping down...to avoid distracting from Barack Obama's message of change."

Who exactly is Jamal Said?

The Justice Department named Mr. Said an unindicted co-conspirator in the racketeering trial last year of several alleged Hamas fund-raisers, which ended in a mistrial. He has also been identified as a leading member of the group in news reports going back to 1993.

Mr. Said is the imam at the Bridgeview Mosque in Bridge-view, Ill., outside Chicago. He left the board of the Islamic fund in 2005, Securities and Exchange Commission filings state. A message left for Mr. Said at the mosque was not returned.

What jafi scum was responsible for this particular scalping?

The eight-year-old connection between Mr. Asbahi and Mr. Said was raised last week by the Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Report, which is published by a Washington think tank and chronicles the activities of the Muslim Brotherhood, a world-wide fundamentalist group based in Egypt. Other Web sites, some pro-Republican and others critical of fundamentalist Islam, also have reported on the background of Mr. Asbahi.

Is orientalism dead?

I admit to not having read Edward Said's Orientalism, but from what I gather, his thesis is that any study of eastern cultures by western historians is necessarily tainted by a racist, condescending, colonial perspective that portrays eastern culture in an inherently inferior light. I have always had trouble accepting this thesis (at least, as far as the modern era - examples of it abound from the colonial era, for example pretty much everything written about India during the British Raj).

Any analysis of a foreign culture is necessarily going to happen across a cultural chasm. As such, it is inevitable that elements of that culture under study will be filtered through the observer's own. The whole point of cultural analysis is to try and understand something alien; the human way to do this is to try and relate it to something more familiar. As a result, the culture under study will be bent and folded (and even mutilated, depending on the skill or lack thereof of the observer) to fit into predefined (and alien) categories.

There probably is always some element of condescension involved as well. Cultural superiority is ingrained deeply by force of habit and the comfort of the familiar. How many times have we seen statements about the West from Islamic sources that seek to portray the West as inherently sinful, hedonistic, without morals, etc. ? Perhaps Western analysts have learned to mask or even suppress their condescension better. But is that condescension the core of the analysis or a side effect? Is the value of the analysis totally negated by it?

A modern day westerner writing about the middle east (which, it should be noted, includes we western muslims as much as it does someone like Michael Totten) will not be immune to these foibles. In my opinion, the thesis of orientalism draws a false line between east and west. In that way Edward Said is as guilty of perpetuating the "Clash" as Samuel Huntington (personally, I favor the Gash of Civilizations theory instead). When i think of Oriental I think of the far east (the Chinese civilization and its offshoots). The middle east is the frontier between east and west, but I don't think you can argue (especially with the adoption of western leftist parliaments and political systems) that its wholly distinct. Neither are they distinct in the religious sphere - after all, there are three great Abrahamic faiths, and they are coterminus at Jerusalem.

I think that we cannot expect a non-muslim writing about the middle east to be too sympathetic to our muslim axioms. It's our task to explain why orthodoxy and faith are important, to rescue terms like hijab and jihad from the negative connotation, to take our own pride in our orthopraxy. A non-muslim writing about the middle east will look for what they know - bars, liberalism, hot chicks - whereas we might see something different. That's not orientalism, its simply culture shock.

Overall, orientalism is badly named. It describes a relationship between colonial powers and its colonies more than it does east vs west or Islam vs (anything). I can't help but speculate that Said's motivation was really to try and establish a distinction between east and west as proxies for the palestinians and the israelis. That conflict is all the more tragic when seen as a fraternal one rather than one at the very frontier between two civilizations, alien and opposed. There's no reason however that the rest of us, who are not embroiled in a life or death struggle over holy land, need to be bound by this formulation. I think we as western muslims especially need to reject the concept of orientalism out of hand.

UPDATE: great essay in The Guardian, "Orientalism is not racism". In my opinion the most important part of the argument is as follows:

Today the west is bleakly incurious about the history of Islam, its art, peoples and learning. There's a blank wall of terror. This wall has been strengthened by Said's book because it closes down a crucial way for cultures to encounter one another: it closes down romanticism.

NOTE: Comments closed here - to discuss this essay, please join the discussion at Talk Islam.

who says muslims don't laugh at themselves?

At Talk Islam, a joke and a photo.

What is an African-American?

Tariq has a very thorough post at his blog expanding on the question of what it means to be African American and whether Obama qualifies to claim that ethnic heritage or not. I think the post expands very well on the earlier discussion and i find myself in agreement now that the term African American does have a special meaning that is best left undiluted. I do still think that the self-identity of AA in the US needs to ultimately free itself of slavery’s shadow, much like the self-identity of Jews needs to free itself of the Holocaust, but in practice I don't know how practical that is.

It must be noted however that the term AA will continue to be used as a broad brush. So i think in one sense if ethnic AA's try to articulate their "ownership" of the term African-American, they do risk being tarred (unfairly) as making the “black enough” argument. It might be better to make the argument in the abstract for the term AA, but adopting a more specific label for pragmatisms’ sake. I personally think “Black American” is more descriptive since Africa, per se, is not really central to the identity in question.

(Note - comments closed here. Please discuss this post at Talk Islam).

Club Med

At Talk Islam, thabet links to a pair of editorials from the FT (skeptical) and the Economist (upbeat) regarding France's proposal for a Mediterranean Union. I must confess, I find the idea of a Mediterranean Union extremely appealing. I found this graphic from the FT rather fascinating, illustrating the economic disparity of the nations around the Med Rim: (click to enlarge)

I am also reminded of the way in which the states surrounding the Great Lakes here in the US came together to form the Great Lakes Compact. Access to the same massive shared body of water means that all adjacent polities have a vested interest in preserving it as a common resource. An economic union across the Med would also be a great way to uplift North Africa in particular, and provide an economic bulwark against fundamentalism.

Introducing Muslim Advocates: freedom and justice for all

Introducing Muslim Advocates - the Muslim-American civil rights group that CAIR should have been. Founded by the National Association of Muslim Lawyers (NAML), they are hitting precisely the right note in their mission statement about seeking freedom and justice for all. They have hit the ground running, by producing this excellent video titled "Got Rights?":

Watch This Video: It will give you crucial Information about how to protect you and your family when approached by law enforcement.Since the terrorist attacks of 9-11, Muslims, Sikhs, Arabs and South Asians have endured particular scrutiny by law enforcement -- and in some cases, questioning and searches that infringe fundamental rights at the core of the Constitution. In this climate, it is vital that members of our communities inform themselves about our rights as Americans.Then, Take Action: Share the video with your family and friends; and visit our website to tell us about your experiences with law enforcement.To change discriminatory policies, we first need to educate our fellow Americans about our experiences. Help stop racial and religious profiling.

Brilliant. They also invite you to share your story with them if you've been denied your rights or had an otherwise unjust encounter with the law.

The importance of this group cannot be overstated. For 15 years, the Council on American-Islamic Relations has failed to really make a case for muslim American civil rights. The failure of CAIR to articulate a national civil rights argument on behalf of muslims has not gone unnoticed - leading CAIR's chairman to resign in frustration (though he certainly deserves some of the blame). CAIR's membership has been steadily dwindling as well.

Is CAIR now irrelevant? Not neccessarily. I've defended CAIR many times because while their national leadership has been inept and controversy-prone, the local state chapters do important work in compiling information about muslim civil liberties violations that would otherwise go unnoticed, as well as basic community outreach, humanitarian work, and of course damage control. MA can step in to fill the gap at the national level but probably won't be able to replicate CAIR's infrastructure on a state-by-state chapter level, at least not for a while. I don't see MA as being capable of doing the community outreach/open-mosque/interfaith yeoman's work, either. The ideal situation would be for genuine reform within CAIR and have these two organizations work independently, but cooperatively, towards the same goals.

My friend Shahed Amanullah recently mused on a number of ways in which CAIR might reform:

a) Change the name. It has the connotation of “American” and “Islamic” being mutually exclusive.
b) Be more selective about the civil rights issues that are taken up, because there are some times when people are just being jerks and not necessarily anti-Muslim. And some actions (i.e. the “flying imams” lawsuit) have ended up having a net negative impact on public opinion about Muslims.
c) Be more broad about the issues taken up. There’s more to being Muslim in America than the right to wear hijab and pray at work.
d) Explicitly reject all foreign funding, like MPAC has done since its founding.
e) Have at least one proactive/positive initiative (outreach, training, community building) for every aggressive one (i.e. lawsuits).
f) Take a different attitude towards the media - the current CAIR attitude towards the media is far too hostile and uncooperative, and it feeds on itself.
g) Push for the inclusion on younger/more diverse leadership, with special attention given to those who were born and/or raised in the US.
h) Focus on Muslim life in America, and leave foreign policy to other Muslim groups. Both are worthy causes, but the pursuit of both at the same time hurts the efficacy of each one.
i) Stop trying to be another ISNA (i.e. stop adding parallel programs that step on the toes of other groups, and stop positioning yourself as an umbrella group for all Muslims.). Focus on what you do best - defending civil rights of Muslims.
j) Thoroughly vet all staffers for anything in their past that can drag down the organization as a whole. (Not trying to discredit past work that people may have done, this is simply a cost-benefit analysis that weighs the skills one brings to the table vs. the obstacles it can place in the way of the larger org goals).

With the advent of MA, CAIR might as well outsource all or part of (b) above to them, as far as lobbying at the national level and engaging in PR work. Of course, at the local level, it's the data collected by local CAIR chapters that MA will need to have access to in order to make their case.

Overall, what CAIR needs is bold ideas and fresh leadership. I know the perfect man for the job as CAIR Chairman but he's already declined to be drafted :) Ultimately though the creation of MA bodes well for muslim-American organizations in general, as long as these orgs realize they are all on the same team and "representing muslim American issues" is not a zero-sum game.

painfully self-aware

More than a few people have brought the seeming hiatus in blogging here at City of Brass to my attention with alarm, asking if I have shuttered this site in favor of a sexier project (Talk Islam, which if you aren't reading, you SHOULD be).

However, while I admit to being distracted of late, nothing could be further from the truth. City of Brass is not going anywhere. Stay tuned, if you've stuck through te drought this long already.


FWIW, I am going to retire the Carnival of Brass, however, in favor of Talk Islam. More details later.

the Qur'an shooter

The US military has officially apologized for the actions of a sergeant who used the Qur'an for target practice.

The incident was earlier strongly condemned by al-Hashemi and the Association of Muslim Scholars, which represents many of Iraq's mosques.

"This heinous crime shows the hatred that the leaders and the members of the occupying force have against the Quran and the [Muslim] people," it said.

It added that it held both the US military and Iraqi government responsible for the incident.

The US army earlier said the staff sergeant, who fired bullets at the Quran and wrote graffiti inside it, had already been removed from Iraq and was to be disciplined.

A heinous crime? good grief. Personally I think that it's literally impossible to demean the Qur'an - the most anyone can do is destroy a copy, but that's an impotent gesture indeed. What need have we of apologies such as these? Why should the empty symbolism of an unbeliever concern us?

If anything is an insult to the Qur'an, it's this compulsive obsession with how the exterior of the physical book is treated rather than what's inside.

UPDATE: President Bush will also make a personal apology.

Pipes' dream

As noted previously, the "Obama is a muslim" smear has evolved into the "Obama is an apostate" smear. The reason for the latest mutation is probably the Wright affair, which put OBAMA - PASTOR - CHURCH in giant headlines for most of April. Hence, the smear has had to adapt, from "he's a muslim" to "he's an apostate". Actually, Luttwak isn't the first to push the Smear v2.0, Daniel Pipes was blathering about it just a few weeks ago:

Obama's Kenyan birth father: In Islam, religion passes from the father to the child. Barack Hussein Obama, Sr. (1936–1982) was a Muslim who named his boy Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. Only Muslim children are named "Hussein".

Eteraz already refuted the assertion about birth fathers:

Islamic law recognizes abandonment by the biological father. Obama's Kenyan father abandoned Obama. As such, any religious imprimatur he may have had over Obama -- which is already a stretch since the man was an atheist -- is null and void. In such a situation, Obama's mother's religion is controlling. She was not Muslim. Even if someone makes the argument from patriarchy: that Obama's paternal grandparents were his rightful guardians, that would fail since they also constructively abandoned him.

There is a corollary issue here: what about the fact that Obama's second father, the Indonesian, was a "non-practicing Muslim." Doesn't his faith transfer over to Obama? The answer is no. Under Islamic law, step-fathers do not acquire ownership over the child. Their relationship to the child emanates from their relationship to the child's mother. Again, Obama's mother was not Muslim. If a practicing Muslim man marries a Christian woman with children from a previous marriage, her children wouldn't automatically become Muslim. Here, the new father wasn't even practicing.

Luttwack and the other fake experts promoting this new smear do not understand Islam. Religion is not hereditary as it is in Judaism. Islam is not a race. Just because a child has a Muslim father -- which, again, Obama didn't -- doesn't mean anything unless the child is being raised as a Muslim. At the time of birth, Muslims engage in a symbolic act -- of saying the Call to Prayer in the child's ear -- that renders a child Muslim. If Obama's father was agnostic/atheist, then he wouldn't have done such a thing.

Pipes claims to be an expert on Islam, but none of the traditional practices or concensus views above seems to penetrate his analysis. I think people of Pipes' ilk are confusing muslims with Jews. Or with Klingons (we already know muslims are Orcs).

As far as Pipes' assertion that only muslims are named Hussein, I wonder what he thinks of these shady characters:

Gen. Omar Bradley, who bore a Semitic, Muslim first name, and shared it with the second caliph of Sunni Islam, was the hero of D-day and Normandy, of the Battle of the Bulge and the Ruhr.
[...]
What about other American heroes, such as Gen. George Joulwan, former NATO supreme allied commander of Europe? "Joulwan" is an Arabic name. Or there is Gen. John Abizaid, former CENTCOM commander. Abizaid is an Arabic name. Abi means Abu or "father of," and Zaid is a common Arab first name.

It should be noted that by Pipe's logic, this fellow might also be an apostate:



Look at that beard! And he's named after a Prophet in Islam, to boot.

Administrative note regarding the Carnival of Brass

The Carnival of Brass is composed of two feeds, one dedicated to blogs (@brass_crescent) and the other devoted to articles in the mainstream media (@COB). However, with the launch of Talk Islam, the latter feed is now obsolete. Please note that there will be no more further updates to the @COB (media) feed, instead I highly recommend that you replace that feed with the one from Talk Islam. Javascript code for embedding the Talk Islam feed is as follows:

<script src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/TalkIslam?format=sigpro" type="text/javascript" ></script>

Please note that the @brass_crescent (blogs) feed is unchanged. You can use the same javascript code for that feed as before. Alternatively you can also use the following code:

<script src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/brass_crescent_blogs?format=sigpro" type="text/javascript" ></script>

The Carnival of Brass FAQ will be updated with this information as well.