Days Black People Not Re-Enslaved By Trump

Tuesday, March 30, 2004

Like Minds

A nice article appeared on the CounterPunch site. It covers the conviction of three men for essentially playing paintball. you can read it here:

http://www.counterpunch.org/cassel03272004.html

quote:
According to a report in a June 28, 2003 Washington Post article, Michael E. Rolince, in charge of the Washington FBI field office, conceded that the government had no evidence of specific plots against U.S. targets at home or abroad. "A lot of this is about preemption," he said.


A lot? How about the entire case? And since when is "preemptive" prosecution constitutional? Apparently, when you are a Muslim in post-September 11-America.


This, my friends is dangerous legal president. These individuals did nothing illegal and broke no laws. They cannot even be had on RICO laws.

Monday, March 29, 2004

Vaccines Against Survival

I was perusing a chat site and ran across this article Where it has been found that Polio vaccines used in Nigeria had been contaminated with a sterilization chemical.

quote:
UNICEF Nigerian Polio Vaccine Contaminated with Sterilizing Agents Scientist Finds Scientist says things discovered in vaccines are "harmful, toxic"
KADUNA, Nigeria, March 11, 2004 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A UNICEF campaign to vaccinate Nigeria's youth against polio may have been a front for sterilizing the nation. Dr. Haruna Kaita, a pharmaceutical scientist and Dean of the Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences of Ahmadu Bello University in Zaria, took samples of the vaccine to labs in India for analysis.

Using WHO-recommended technologies like Gas Chromatography (GC) and Radio-Immuno assay, Dr. Kaita, upon analysis, found evidence of serious contamination. "Some of the things we discovered in the vaccines are harmful, toxic; some have direct effects on the human reproductive system," he said in an interview with Kaduna's Weekly Trust. "I and some other professional colleagues who are Indians who were in the Lab could not believe the discovery," he said.


and what's worse:

This is not the first time UNICEF has been embroiled in a controversy over sterilizing agents in vaccines.
LifeSiteNews.com reported that in 1995, the Catholic Women's League of the Philippines won a court order halting a UNICEF anti-tetanus program because the vaccine had been laced with B-hCG, which when given in a vaccine permanently causes women to be unable to sustain a pregnancy. The Supreme Court of the Philippines found the surreptitious sterilization program had already vaccinated three million women, aged 12 to 45. B-hCG-laced vaccine was also found in at least four other developing countries.


Now about those supposed HIV medications.....

Links:
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004/mar/04031101.htmlM

Sunday, March 28, 2004

Booker T and Garvey redeemed

In the past two weeks or so there have been various reports regarding the unemployment level of blacks in NYC. Apparently the stats show a rate of 49% unemployment among black men and 43% unemployment among black females. A New York Times article entitled: Nearly Half of [New York City] Black Men Found Jobless written by Janny Scott gave the following statistic:

Mark Levitan, the report's author, found that just 51.8 percent of black men ages 16 to 64 held jobs in New York City in 2003. The rate for white men was 75.7 percent; for Hispanic men, 65.7; and for black women, 57.1. The employment-population ratio for black men was the lowest for the period Mr. Levitan has studied, which goes back to 1979.

"We're left with a very big question,'' Mr. Levitan, a senior policy analyst with the society, said in an interview. "As the economy recovers, will we see a rise in employment among black men in tandem with the rise in employment of city residents generally? In other words, is this fundamentally a cyclical problem or is it more deeply structural? I fear that it is more deeply structural."


What I ask the reader to consider is the following pattern. The greater the economic independence of the group the lower their reported unemployment rate. So given that whites in general "run the roost" then their relatively low rate of unemployment is expected. Looking at Hispanics we are forced to look at a few things. In contrast to Blacks (note some Hispanics are black, but for simplicity sake we'll entertain the implied dichotomy), Hispanics have greater economic power than blacks, specifically American born blacks. I specify American born blacks because there is a large and growing population of non-American (as in descendents of those enslaved) blacks who demonstrate similar economic activity as to Hispanics and other non-black immigrants. When one goes into a black community one thing that generally stands out is that the ownership of various businesses are of people who are not of the same racial or ethnic grouping. Laundry by Asians, Gas stations by Indians and Arabs. Pharmacies by Indians or Whites, Fast food places generally owned by whites, Fish markets owned by Asians. Supermarkets are generally owned by whites. American Blacks generally own hair salons and mom-and pop "Soul Food" joints. So there is a discernible pattern that links business ownership and employment. Why does this redeem Booker T Washington and Marcus Garvey?

When I was a youngster I was indoctrinated into believing that although Booker T Washington was "the man" for founding Tuskegee Normal Institute, he was still a sellout for his "accomodationist" views towards whites. Apparently his sin was to tell blacks (and whites) that blacks should forgo politics in favor of developing skills and various industries and building up themselves economically and then moving into politics. This was summed up by his "cast your bucket where you are" story. This view was and continues to be derided by much of the black intelligensia. They favor WEB Dubois' idea that the talented tenth should put social and political pressure on the white establishment to "let them in" and "treat them equally." Of course we now see what the Talented Tenth does when they "get in." Marcus Garvey was also of the opinion that Blacks had to develop industrially to become economically independent of whites. Once they had done so they would be able to demand the political and social respect of whites regardless of what the latter thought personally of them.

Both of these views were uniformly rejected by black "leadership" and "intelligensia." fast forward to today. Blacks who rejected black business and development to "integration" and "political favors" are now facing unemployment at high rates. Manufacturing jobs, or the "steel plantations" are being pushed over seas. The impact is the precipitous drop in family incomes as black men are unable to bring bread to the table. Black farmers, who have been losing land to large white corporations are also the victim of the Talented Tenth, who failed to use their talent to found large black corporations to protect black farmland. So too has the black consumer failed to support black businesses, including banks. This failure, especially virulent after integration, has resulted in the near decimation of black businesses. There are many black businesses today that are more wary of black consumers than white businesses in Jim Crow days.

Now we have Black organizations, such as the NAACP, the Urban League, etc. who now support the idea of Black business ownership and development on a large scale. Yet these same organizations, well The NAACP were prime movers in the demotion of "manual labor" and "international black business."

As an aside, my understanding is that people who are self employed are not included in the employment records. I wonder what impact their numbers would have if these persons were included in the employment figures.
Coups. We Ain't Talkin' 'bout Sports Cars

It seems that yet again there is war in the DRC.

quote:
Shells were also dropped on densely populated parts of town, and a private television station also came under attack.

"Rocket-propelled grenades were fired from the direction of the Palais de la Nation [Presidential Palace] in the direction of the president's house and fire returned," said the UK Ambassador in Kinshasa, Jim Atkinson, quoted by Reuters news agency.

Unnamed police officers quoted by AFP news agency said the attackers were former members of the personal guard of the late dictator Mobutu Sese Seko - who was ousted in 1997.


And for those of you not in the know, Mobutu was a CIA stooge who ran the DRC, then Zaire, into the ground and then got a flight to a chatteu in the French Alps. Interest in the DRC ranges from Diamonds, Uranium, plutonium and if I remember correctly, Coultan, which runs our cell phones. The crassness of these "rebels" regearding the lives of the citizens of this country is simply inexecusable. I suppose that these former "big men" do not find civilian life rewarding enough that they feel the need to get back into "power" in order to live the lush life. I could go on and on about US and European complicity in these affairs but I realy need to ask when will the pawns just get themselves off or get put off the chess board? How is it that their "brothers in arms" do not see that after years of fighting that they are only making the country worse? Of course they do. They just don't care. And of course "not caring" was the prerequisite for getting the arms.

Links:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3576139.stm

Friday, March 26, 2004

Bully in de Yard

Democracy Now is reporting that Ms. Rice (tha skeeza) has sent a warning to the Jamaican government that it must expell Aristide from it's country. It is also understood that if "anything happened to any American forces in Haiti, that the consequences of that would be exacted against a president or against Jamaica by the United States with full force."

quote:

RANDALL ROBINSON: I don't know that the specific actions that the U.S. would take, or were made, were spelled out. It was clear that Ms. Rice told the Jamaican Government that if Aristide was not expelled immediately, and anything happened to any American forces in Haiti, that the consequences of that would be exacted against a president or against Jamaica by the United States with full force. Now, one doesn't know what that means, but we know what America is capable of doing. It's abducted the President. It executed the coup. It took him to a country with which it has no relations, nor does any African country to speak of, that the state department warns all people not to go to. We brought him back to Jamaica, to his home region and the U.S., of course, has brought full weight of its authority upon Jamaica to have him expelled immediately. Hearing that his simple presence there would cause people in Haiti to rally to salvage their democracy.

AMY GOODMAN: How do you know Randall Robinson that Condolezza Rice is the one who’s applying pressure to Jamaica to expel the Aristides.

RANDALL ROBINSON: My source in the White House named Condoleezza Rice.


links:
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/03/25/1537236

Tuesday, March 23, 2004

Like I Said...

It would seem that my posting here has become less and less frequent. Indeed it is but not for lack of reading or time, but sometimes I get really annoyed, aggravated at some of the foolishness I see "a gwan." over at Znet there is an article which picks up on a point that I made earlier. When the US goes about supporting coups and randomly killing folks without "due process." there is much danger. Yesterday Israel killed the leader of Hamas, an elderly man who "sent" out suicide bombers to Israel. In other words he was killed for running an organization, perhaps making a few "incendiary" speeches. But physically he did nothing himself. You could say that he was a "white collar terrorist." This assassination reminds me of when a blind cleric (the name escapes me) was convicted by the US government for "inciting or exhorting" the persons who first bombed the Twin Towers. It struck me as odd that a person could be tried and convicted of suggesting that someone commit a crime. It would be like me telling someone to go kill his or herself, and after they do it, being arrested. It's not my fault they actually did it. For a nation that prides itself on the concept of personal responsibility it seems it too likes to do the group think mentality. Therein lies the problem with suicide bombers and the like. the real lawbreaker usually dies in the act. There really is no one else to blame except perhaps the bomb maker. But if we assume that all persons involved even if not directly, are criminally accountable, then that would mean all kinds of things for the US. Of course, I think that many in power know this and it is why the US is not a signatory to the World Court. Anyway I'm off topic. As it stands the assassination of Yassin, among others by the IDF who uses US made military machinery, means that the US is criminally accountable for the actions of those who use it's material. That is exactly the argument used against so-called "Al-Qaida" and it is exactly what various Palestinians will say. What is worse, and the writer over at Znet agrees is that like the backing of a Coup against a democratically elected president, backing assassinations will send the message out that everybody is fair game. A kind of street mentality will rise to new levels. the street mentality being: "get him before he can get me." Of course Bush already made it known that such an ideology was what he was going to practice. But oh how quickly it spreads. And when such a mentality spreads all are potential victims of crossfire. But alas, the US decision makers don't take public airlines or public transportation. With the exception of the Pentagon bombing, they do not have to come into contact with the consequences of their decisions. But the "terrorist" does live with the consequences. they know that "martyrdom" is a helicopter missile away and "still they rise."

I tell anyone who will listen that the number of attacks and deaths due to "terrorism" is not limited by security but by the imagination. ego and moral limitation of the "terrorist." Once the "terrorist" realizes that ego targets are not necessary, then the real body count will begin. People will be killed in malls, parking lots, buses, sidewalks, nightclubs, ferries, playgrounds, amusement parks, factories, Universities, high schools. There will be random murders here and there with "no clues." They will avoid big cities and kill off small towns. Poison fields of wheat. perhaps kill off some dairy cows. everything and anything to keep the US on a constant state of fear and push investors to leave. force enough money from educational and social services to do massive damage to the social wellbeing of the nation. What is worse is that the people making the decisions have not even begun to see how far this will go. People take movies like The Matrix and Terminator as a joke. Sit down and take a long think about the premises of these movies and look at what the government is proposing to do or actively trying to do. In all of Human history there has always, ALWAYS been war. How does this or any other administration think it will "end terrorism" without dealing with the underlying causes? There is no military means to "end terrorism." No, that's not true; there is a military means to end terrorism: genocide.

quote:
But there was something infinitely more dangerous in all this. Yet another Arab - another leader, however vengeful and ruthless - had been assassinated. The Americans want to kill Osama Bin Laden. They want to kill Mullah Omar. They killed Saddam's two sons. The Israelis repeatedly threaten to murder Yasser Arafat. It's getting to be a habit.


No one has begun to work out the implications of all this. For years, there has been an unwritten rule in the cruel war of government-versus- guerrilla. You can kill the men on the street, the bomb makers and gunmen. But the leadership on both sides - government ministers, spiritual leaders - were allowed to survive.


Now all is changed utterly. Anyone who advocates violence is now on a death list. So who can be surprised if the rules are broken by the other side?


With all their own security, Bush and Blair may be safe, but what about their ambassadors and fellow ministers? Leaders are fair game. We will not say this. If, or when, our own political leaders are gunned down or blown up, we shall vilify the killers and argue a new stage in "terrorism" has been reached. We shall forget that we are now encouraging this all- out assassination spree


Links:
http://www.zmag.org/content/print_article.cfm?itemID=5191§ionID=40

Friday, March 19, 2004

The Shell Game

I've told everyone that would listen not to buy Shell oil or gas because of the situation in Nigeria. Most people, these being largely black people, didn't care. The same excuse was always given: I live here, blah blah blah. anyway. the NYTimes has an article covering Shells recent reserves issues
turns out a part of the reason for overstating reserves was too prop up the Nigerian government. The same government that put Ken Saro Wiwa to death for advocating that Shell stop polluting his peoples land. I told ya'll Shell was dirty.

quote:

In any case, the documents about Nigeria offer a far bleaker assessment of Nigerian operations than the company's public disclosures.

Nigeria, for example, has called for an end to the practice of flaring, or burning off, natural gas that is a byproduct of oil production; two billion cubic feet of natural gas are burned this way in Nigeria every day, and this has become an environmental and political issue. Mr. Corrigan said the company was committed to meeting the target. Shell's Web site says "this opportunity" to gather gas "is going well."

But the Shell documents present a different view. A high-level review in December found that many oil field projects did not include plans to gather natural gas, and that "oil production would have to be shut in," or stopped, unless the company found a way to use the gas. Shell could sell it in Europe or the United States, but natural gas is expensive to transport across the ocean.


Links:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/19/business/worldbusiness/19OIL.html?hp

Monday, March 15, 2004

bones Fall Out The Closet

The one thing about lies is that if you tell to many of them, you eventually forget which lies you told and get caught lying about the lie. Donald Rumsfeld has apparently fallen victim to one of his ["many, many, many many many" to quote the Fugees] lies. as recorded by the Center for American Progress

quote:
"You and a few other critics are the only people I've heard use the phrase 'immediate threat.' I didn't...It's become kind of folklore that that's what happened."

- Donald Rumsfeld, 3/14/04

VERSUS

"No terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people than the regime of Saddam Hussein and Iraq."

- Donald Rumsfeld, 9/19/02

In addition there is a nice video clip available that shows Rumsfeld on CBS' Face the Nation. I'l be downloading that clip and storing it for posterity.

Links:
http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=6228

http://www.americanprogress.org/atf/cf/%7bE9245FE4-9A2B-43C7-A521-5D6FF2E06E03%7d/RUMSFELDDENY4.WMV
Seemingly Unrelated

In a recent discussion with a netizen I was re-iterating the importance of understanding Dr. Frances Cress Welsing's cone shaped diagram. This diagram is used to illustrate how seemingly unrelated items can in fact be related if one performs some analysis. In her diagram the top (circle) portion of the cone has different dots referencing different items. In her case these items were the areas of people activity. At the base of the cone was a single item,which for her purposes was White Supremacy. One quickly realizes that such a cone can be used to connect various items and each item on the top of the cone can have it's own cone of convergence. As fate usually does me, shortly after having this discusion, I ran across this piece over at Bushwars..

quote:

Additional evidence that Cheney played an early planning role is contained in a previously undisclosed National Security Council document, dated February 3, 2001. The top-secret document, written by a high-level NSC official, concerned Cheney's newly formed Energy Task Force. It directed the NSC staff to cooperate fully with the Energy Task Force as it considered the "melding" of two seemingly unrelated areas of policy: "the review of operational policies toward rogue states," such as Iraq, and "actions regarding the capture of new and existing oil and gas fields."... "But if this little group was discussing geostrategic plans for oil, it puts the issue of war in the context of the captains of the oil industry sitting down with Cheney and laying grand, global plans."

A baby elephant takes 9 months to gestate. no wonder these folks are Republicans.

links:
http://babelogue.citypages.com:8080/sperry/2004/03/15

Wednesday, March 10, 2004

Iraq...Haiti...Equatorial Guinea?

Not satisfied with Iraq and Haiti, evidence is growing that an American plane filled with suspected mercenaries were headed to Eq. Guinea in order to overthrow that government. To be honest I haven't been up on what the situation in that country is, but with Zimbabwe about to put the 60 people from that plane on trial, there may be some serious info about to get put out.

quote:
Equatorial Guinea arrested a separate group of 15 suspected mercenaries, said to be involved in the same alleged plot.

The oil-rich state's president said South Africa had warned him that a group of mercenaries was heading for his country and he suggested that they had had foreign backing of hostile foreign powers and multinational firms.

A man said to be the leader of the "mercenaries" has appeared on Equatorial Guinea state television to say that they had been part of a plot to remove Mr Obiang and put an exiled opposition leader in power.

"It wasn't a question of taking the life of the head of state but of spiriting him away, taking him to Spain and forcing him into exile and then of immediately installing the government-in-exile of Severo Moto Nsa," said the alleged coup leader, who introduced himself as Nick du Toit, according to a transcript released by AFP news agency.

In Spain, Mr Moto, who led a failed coup bid in Equatorial Guinea in 1997, denied any role in the alleged plot but also launched a blistering attack on President Obiang, who himself took power in a coup in 1979.


Read the rest over at the BBC

Links:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3500132.stm

Monday, March 08, 2004

The Saddest Thing

The saddest thing on the planet is arguably a black person who so hates themselves that they feel the need to tell it. The second saddest thing is possibly the fact that someone would actually give them space to publish their self hatred. Or maybe it's our fortune to get to actually know that such incredibly sad people are among us. I don't know. but this specimen of self hatred landed in my browser this morning. It is from the Jamaica-Gleaner, a publication that gave Garvey hell:

quote:
A republic in the hands of a black politician is a passport to hell. The best thing for us is the Westminster model with a Prime Minister and a Governor-General representing the Queen. A Prime Minister and a president is a confusion of meaning, and guaranteed to cause a lot of quarrelling and political conspiracy.

Well there we have it. Perhaps this individual doesn't realize that such an opinion on black rule is a large part of the problem. After all our good friend and egun (Ancestor) Carter G. Woodson, already explained the propensity that blacks have, as a result of slavery and colonialism, to not want to be "bossed about" by other blacks, but prefer to take instruction and direction from whites. I cannot imagine a chinese, European or Indian making such a assinine statement. Well I could but at least these people actually run their own.

Indeed the author makes one good statement:

Any political regime which operates on the basis of race is doomed to failure, and always in the most spectacular fashion.

true indeed. Once in power, running a country has very little to do with race and should rarely come up in day to day operations, but as a country of mostly black people and the continual target of US and European meddling you'd be an ass to think that race doesn't matter.

Links:

http://www.jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20040307/cleisure/cleisure3.html

Saturday, March 06, 2004

Garvey and the Klan: Why folks still get it wrong

There are two things about Marcus Garvey that most people get twisted:

1) Garvey was about going back to Africa.
2) Garvey was down with the Klan.

The first mischaracterization can be understood because most people are introduced to Marcus Garvey via a blurb in a history book. Of course no one had picked up The Philosophies and Opinions of Marcus Garvey. The second issue is usually found among people that dared to go beyond what they were told (if told anything at all). Somehow the meeting between Garvey and the Grand Wizard of the KKK get misconstrued as meaning that Garvey and the Klan had the same aims or at a minimum Garvey was giving in to the Klan. Neither position is the truth and it takes only a cursory glance at Garvey’s own words to realize this.

Last week while in correspondence with someone who’s opinions I respect, I was shocked to receive the following comment:

In my opinion, as someone who was half-raised in Jim Crow Georgia, Garvey's explanation far beyond weak: it is ludicrous. Garvey's internal logic ceded the U.S. to the white man - an ideological convergence with white American Manifest Destiny. His Klan overtures were a consequence of that logic.

Moreover, for a Jamaican to describe African Americans - northern- or
southern-born, as being out of touch with the realities of American racism
is outrageously pretentious bombast.


Had I been any other person I guess such a comment would have gone past me as fact or at least an informed opinion. However, this is “Garvey’s Ghost” and no way such a position can be allowed to stand.

First let’s look at Garvey’s own words regarding his meeting with the Klan and why he chose to engage them in dialog:

”I repeat, knowing the power and influence and intentions of the Klan, I interviewed them for the purpose of getting them, if possible, to adopt a different attitude towards the race and thus prevent a repetition in many ways of what happened during the days of reconstruction. Because of this, my efforts to stave off an impeding danger by a better understanding of the attitudes of this organization, this unthinking bombast [George Harris] steps out with the full authority of his ignorance to accuse me of surrendering to the Wizard and forming an alliance with the Klan. This has been the attitude of a large number of Negro editors who live in the North, who do not come into daily contact with the Ku Klux Klan as millions of our people do in the Southern States. These wiseacres and so called race-patriots remain 1500 and 2000 miles away and write all kinds of stuff against the South, and against the Ku Klux Klan, and against people with whom they do not come in contact, leaving the people who really come into contact with them to suffer from the result of their senseless and hypocritical propaganda. Some Negro men who talk and write up North will make a big noise as far as Washington, but whenever the conductor requests of them to change cars they become mum as an oyster”
-Marcus Garvey
Negro World, July 22,1922

Why would Garvey be worried about impending “danger?” what was his motivation?
In 1920 a group under Reverend T.C. Glashen organized a local chapter of the UNIA in Key West, Florida. Immediately following, the whites of that community organized a local KKK branch. Rev. Glashen was given 24 hours to leave town by the president of the “chamber of commerce” (suuuuuuuuuure he was….). When the Reverend refused he was arrested and jailed. After intervention from the UNIA in headquarters a Judge visited Glashen and requested he leave in order to avoid clashes between a white mob and the UNIA. Glashen left for NY via Havana CUBA since it was believed that he would be killed if he attempted the trip overland.

In 1922 R.B. Mosely, UNIA high commissioner for Texas was jailed while organizing for the UNIA. Upon release from jail he was beaten by a gang of eight white men.
Further stories of harassment were related by delegates at the 1922 UNIA convention, In one case a young man was lynched for selling UNIA stock

The 1921 convention parade featured a banner that proclaimed “ The Negro is Ready for The Klan” But given the actual danger that the UNIA was putting it’s members into Garvey seeing the bigger picture decided that he would make a deal. Clearly then, this is not a case of Garvey being an outsider and not aware of the Klan. Thus the charge that Garvey was giving in or such things are false and in this day and age slanderous.

What of the charge that Garvey’s “internal logic ceded the US to the white man.” First, before getting into Garvey’s own words I must say that Garvey was not a dreamer, but a realist and a planner. Garvey was not the type to deal in moral suasion or emotional appeals to white people in order to do what he knew had to be done. Garvey was dealing with power, its acquisition and it’s use. Garvey said:

It does not mean that all Negroes should leave America and the West Indies and go to Africa to build up a government. It did not take all the peoples of Europe to come over to America to lay the foundation of the great republic; therefore those who write disparagingly of the grand programme of Africa are doing so without paying attention to history… we say to all Negroes of America, the West Indies and elsewhere, seize all opportunities that come to you, but remember out successes educationally, industrially and politically is based upon the protection of a nation founded by ourselves. And that nation can be nowhere else but in Africa”

Clearly then, the charge that Garvey ceded the US to the white man is unfounded. Garvey was well aware that in 1922 blacks had no power in the US, a situation that has changed only nominally. Today blacks still do not own Black Star Lines, Black Star factories, etc. And the Blacks who could own such things outsource to Asia or to white owned companies (Sean John anyone?). Thus it wasn’t an issue of ceding anything to the white man; it was merely observing that which was. Why is it that when blacks talk of Africa they are looked at as being crazy, yet as Garvey pointed out repeatedly, everybody else seems to find good reason to go set up shop there and extract it’s resources. This goes back to the larger picture I mentioned earlier.

The Ku Klux Klan believes that black people are genetically inferior to whites. As such they expect that blacks will always have a dependent relationship with whites. In addition to this they, being Americans, also believe that they can take whatever they want from blacks whenever they want. Garveyism, in the long run would counter such sentiments. Garveyism followed and practiced would make for strong black countries (perhaps even a global federated state) that whites (including the Klan types) would not be able to control and exploit as they are able to do today (see Haiti and Venezuela for recent examples). The existence of such an economically and militarily powerful state would not be exploitable the “west” would lose its sources of raw material (and sports and entertainers to boot). But most, but by no means all, Klan members are too shortsighted to see this. So long as they think that Negroes are in their place and out of community sight, they think they have “won.” This is why Bilbo and others of Garvey’s time thought they had “much in common” with Garvey. As written in The Art of War:

It is one of the most important tasks of command ‘to effect timely and proper change of tactics according to the conditions of the units and of the terrain, both on the enemy’s side and our own’ One yields when it is expedient [like member threatened with lynching]; he gives A in order to take B [he arranges a truce with a violent enemy in order to give his organization organizing room]. my comments.

Clearly then the author of the note I received via email is just plain wrong on all counts regarding Garvey. I do hope they read this and it spurs them to do proper research on Garvey and Garveyism.

Friday, March 05, 2004

Another One Bites The Dust

Since the 9-11 set up, There has been a dramatic increase in the dissasembly of so called "guaranteed" freedoms. the new York Times posted an article that should strike fear in the hearts of "law abiding citizens." What happened was that two individuals out of Virginia were convicted of "helping in waging global Jihad." Apparently the basis of this case rests on two things;

a) the Neutrality Act and
b) The fact that some of the individuals engaged in paintball.

While the Neutrality Act, on it's face is an iinnocent looking law, when it is used in conjunction with other more nefarious laws, it can be exploited for all kinds of things. But that's not even the kicker. The kicker is the paintball evidence.

Last i checked anyone can play paintball legally. In fact White Separtist movements use such things all the time.

quote:

It also accused Mr. Chapman, who had served in the Marines, with helping to train other group members in combat techniques while playing paintball.

"For the defendants and their co-conspirators," Judge Brinkema, a Clinton appointee, wrote, "these games were viewed as not just an opportunity for outdoor exercise, fellowship and an opportunity to improve self-defense skills, but also as preparation for real combat."


All over the United States there are armed militias who do "legal" hunting and paintball "military training." these militias are known to have bombed churches and most famously the Federal Building in Oklahoma. How does the government justify the conviction of these individuals for playign paintball while these white supremacists do the same and face no prosecution?

Very bad adjucating. Very bad.

Links:
http://nytimes.com/2004/03/05/national/05PAIN.html?pagewanted=2

Wednesday, March 03, 2004

Ironic Ain't It?

So perusing black electorate I stumbled across this article
On Blacks (largely clergy) and Homosexual marriage. I won't get into my position on it other than to say that a secular government with a stated separation between Church and State will have a hard time legislating a largely religious issue. And If Homosexual marriages are approved then Polygamists ought to get their "rights' soon after.

Anyway... what was amusing about the article was the following:
quote:
    "Black pastors understand what's at stake here, and they're not going to put their color before Christ," said Mrs. Parker, whose group, Coalition on Urban Renewal and Education, is helping organize the San Francisco rallies. "You want to wage war with the black evangelical church? You got it."

They seem to not put much before their Christ. Given that the Historical Jesus was described as having wholy hair and feet the color of burnt brass, They still have huge stringy haired, blue (sometimes brown) eyed, pale skinned Jesus' on their programs and the like. They are the first to tell you how the color of the Christ doesn't matter, yet fail to understand the very real connection between the white "Christ" and "racism."

I just got a chuckle out of that and wanted to share.

Tuesday, March 02, 2004

And It Get's Better!!!

One of the "opposition" has declared himself the "military chief" of Haiti. Also Claude Duvalier who has been chillin' in Miami has stated his intention to return to Haiti. Oh the fun is really about to begin!!

quote:

Haiti plunged deeper into political anarchy today as one of the rebellion's leaders proclaimed himself the new commander of the army, appearing to grab power without legal authority.

"I am the chief," the rebel leader, Guy Philippe, announced at a conference. "The military chief."

The Haitian army was dissolved in 1995 by President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, who fell from power on Sunday, after a hard shove from the United States. Many of the armed rebels who stormed into Haiti's capital on Monday are veterans of the army, which overthrew Mr. Aristide in 1991, and past leaders of military-affiliated death squads.

....Complicating the political chaos, Jean-Claude Duvalier, Haiti's former "president for life," said in Miami that he planned to return to Haiti. He ruled from the 1971 death of his father, François, the dictator known as "Papa Doc," until the army overthrew him in 1986. During the three-decade Duvalier dynasty, the government killed thousands of opponents and stole many millions of dollars from Haiti's treasury.

With the apparent grab for power by Mr. Philippe and his rebel allies, Haiti seemed to be falling deeper into the clutches of a self-appointed armed junta.

"It is an absolutely failed state — no institutions, no rule of law, no spirit of compromise, no security," said Robert Pastor, director of the Center for Democracy and Election Management at American University. Mr. Pastor has monitored elections here since 1987.


Did I mention a bet?

Links:
http://nytimes.com/2004/03/02/international/americas/02CND-HAIT.html?hp
Meanwhile.....

With all eyes on Haiti and the despicable turn of events that ended Aristide's term prematurely, not much is being said about the haps in Venezuela where Hugo Chavez is once again faced with outsiders attempting to oust him from office.
Just like in Haiti, the "opposition" has been getting press while they demonstrate, kill and loot the country. Venezuela however, is no Haiti. Having once tried and failed to remove Chavez via Coup, they are going the California route and attempting to recall Chavez via a ballot referendum.:

quote:
Some opposition leaders expressed disappointment with the Organization of American States, which had brokered a deal between the government and its opponents that the opposition leaders thought would lead to a recall vote. "They told us that this was the quickest path," said Antonio Ledezma, an opposition leader.

Mr. Chávez, in a fiery speech on Sunday, said his government would recognize the signatures and would permit a referendum if enough signatures were "repaired." But opponents continued to assert that the new measure was nothing more than a delaying tactic aimed at ensuring that Mr. Chávez remained in power.

Under the country's electoral guidelines, if the recall takes place after Aug. 20, Mr. Chávez's vice president could finish out his term. Opponents fear that if that happens, Mr. Chávez would rule from behind the scenes while campaigning to win the next presidential elections, in 2006.

The Bush administration, which has clashed repeatedly with Mr. Chávez, has expressed support for a recall vote. Scott McClellan, the White House spokesman, said, "The focus should remain on the efforts by the Venezuelan people to exercise their constitutional and democratic rights" in "a transparent and internationally monitored presidential recall referendum."


So not only are dictators the like of Saddam Hussein targets for "regime change" so are democratically elected leaders. the Bush administration is true to it's word that you're either with us or against us. Do they not realize the amount of global instability that will result from activily supporting the abrupt termination of elected officials terms? How do you create stable societies when the "opposition" can rest assured that the US will hand guns and butter and terminate any president that they don't like? What is the point of having a constitutionally determined presidential term if no one is allowed to actually fulfil their terms. Furthermore, if the short-cutting of the election cycle is democratic, why couldn't president Bush be recalled? Where is our recall provision for US presidents?

Meanwhile, African leaders, probably shook that they too will be the next leader to face armed 'opposition." are giving Aristide the run around regearding asylum.

quote:
Newly arrived in the impoverished Central African Republic, Haiti's ex-president, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, on Monday blasted the rebels who ousted him from power on Sunday, saying that "in overthrowing me, they have chopped down the tree of peace, but it will grow again."

Government radio in Bangui, the republic's capital, said Mr. Aristide was being accommodated only for a few days, probably until he received permanent asylum in South Africa.

But South African officials gave mixed signals as to their willingness to take in Mr. Aristide. Domestic critics of President Thabo Mbeki, one of Mr. Aristide's few international supporters, excoriated the government for even considering it


All pomp and circumstance. No balls.

Links:
http://nytimes.com/2004/03/02/international/africa/02ARIS.html

http://nytimes.com/2004/03/02/international/americas/02VENE.html