Thursday, September 27, 2007
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
I guess undercover white supremacists are feeling themselves in the wake of the non justice in Jena.
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, Fla. -- Police said four teenagers have been charged with a hate crime and one man has been charged with attempted murder after a black college student was beaten and nearly drowned at a beach during the weekend.
Miguel Aranda, 18, Marino Biondini, Gilberto Maakaroun, both 17, and a 15-year-old whose name is being withheld are charged with a hate crime and battery in connection with the beating of Stephen Barnett, 22. Aranda and Maakaroun are also charged with attempted felony murder.
I was just down there 3 months ago.
A New Movie showing now in Manhattan NYC:
209 West Houston Street, New York, NY 10014Map It
One agitator, a former Confederate soldier and the future mayor of Wilmington, vowed that he and other like-minded whites would never surrender “even if we have to choke the Cape Fear River with carcasses.” What followed was a coup d’état, possibly the only time that a municipal government was toppled in American history. Black residents were murdered; the local black newspaper was torched, and survivors exiled. Reconstruction died, and Jim Crow moved right in.
Just so people can see why the Jena situation is so offensive and not to be taken lightly.
A critical gap
This month those dreams were challenged with the release of data showing that suburban black children, even in prosperous communities like Owings Mills, were failing state-mandated high school exams at a rate far greater than their white classmates...
White students at Glen Burnie and Dundalk high schools also didn't do well on Maryland's High School Assessments. And it is easy to point out four or five majority-black city high schools where students are excelling.
But on every test given widely in public schools in Maryland, black children as a group score far below their white peers -- from the Maryland School Assessments taken in the third grade to the High School Assessments, Advanced Placement exams and SATs.
And this gap does not disappear depending on where students live and how much their parents earn. African-American children are scoring worse as a whole, whether they are at a poorly performing inner-city school or a top suburban high school such as Dulaney in Baltimore County, Severna Park in Anne Arundel or Atholton in Howard County. African-American students in those schools do better on the tests than African-Americans in poorly performing schools, but their pass rate is still below other students at their school.
The gaps in performance between white and black students are significant. In general, they range from 15 to 30 percentage points, depending on the test and the grade.
This article should be a wake up call to all the Cosby haters out there. Back in July or 2004 I posted a piece entitled Of Bantus and Bill in which we find:
at Mission Vista one Friday, Ms. Osman's son, Abdullahi Osman, 15, sat at home at the dining table, homework assignments and an English-Somali dictionary in his lap...Until I finish my education, I don't want to do anything else," said Abdullahi, who dreams of becoming a doctor. He said that books were his most valued possessions, though he checks them out of the public library.In this recent Baltimore Sun piece we find:
...Hamadi, who goes to school and helps his brother at his job at a Boston Market restaurant, said of his new life, "I don't have time for watching TV"
But the income distinctions do not explain why middle-class black students aren't doing better...Is Hrabowski out of line with the TV comment? Well I pointed out back in May of 2004 that:
He says he wishes more parents would turn off the television set and get children away from their computer games. Too often children don't understand how much hard work and discipline is required to become successful academically, Hrabowski said.
After having this discussion I took a gander at The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education (no 24, Spring 2004) where I stumbled across an article attempting to discuss the general low-scores of blacks on the SAT. Among the 14 points discussed ETS, two immediatlty jumped out at me:So it is already established that far greater numbers of black children have full time jobs watching television. Are we then not surprised that we are seeing this persistent gap in achievement? And if we take into account that a good number of parents allow their children to take in videos of people who entertain with the same low vocabulary count as said 4th graders, you have a recipe for disasterous academic performance.
12) Reading to Young Children: Almost two thirds of all white children ages three to five are read to every day. Only 48 percent of black children in this age group are read to daily.
13) Television Watching: In black households, 42 percent of fourth-graders watch six or more hours of televisions each day. Only 13 percent of white fourth-graders watch six or more hours of television each day.
I will agree with the area of the article that discusses the tracking of black students into non AP courses. However, it is incumbent on parents to address these things. I got into AP classes because my mother insisted that I be put in there and then she rode my butt to make sure I kept the grades up.
Technorati Tags: Black Education
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
In light of the silly discussion on race that I got into, the following link just had me shaking my head:
Whoopi: “Is the world flat?”
Sherri: “I don’t know.”
Ummm, did we go to school?
Entire movie here: http://www.crooksandliars.com/Media/Play/21552/2/the-view-on-evolution2.wmv
Seriously, I would be embarrassed to even say that.
Nicole Colson has an excellent review of the Jena 6 situation which underlines the violence that black folk are under:
In late November, Robert Bailey, a Black student, was beaten up at a party attended by mostly whites. According to the Louisiana Public Defenders' Association, police initially refused to let Bailey make a complaint against his attacker and warned Black students at the party to get "get their Black asses out of this part of town."
A few nights later, Bailey and two others were threatened by a white student with a sawed-off shotgun at the town's "Gotta Go" convenience store. The three wrestled the gun away and fled, but instead of police arresting the white student who pulled the gun, Bailey was initially arrested and charged with second-degree robbery, theft of a firearm and disturbing the peace...
Blacks who have tried speaking out against racism in the past in Jena have found themselves retaliated against, Gibbs says. "If you get too outspoken here," he says, "you might show up at work in the morning and find you don't have a job. So that's what took it so long to come out."
Monday, September 24, 2007
It's the bullshit they're full with...
Worshipping the very same satan that they created
On Thursday Sept. 20. Michael Fisher posted a piece on his blog (that is also shared with others), Assault on Black Folks Sanity entitled: Proof That The System Of Global Racism/White Supremacy Exists
At the beginning of the post he quoted a Nazi which I'll repost here:
“The individual races can be distinguished by differences which they have in respect to the uniqueness of their hereditary, intellectual-psychological and physical features, tendencies and characteristics. Each race has certain characteristics and features which are unique to it. These racial features are passed on to the offspring. Race is hence a group of life forms which distinguishes itself by the common possession of certain hereditary features. It always produces only its own kind. Race is a characterized community of hereditary factors.” Mamet/Nazi SS
While I'm no fan of Nazi's, the above paragraph is accurate as far as it goes with the possible exception of the "intellectual-psychological" features as it relates to humans since there has been no proof of inherent intellectual differences in humans that has not been explained by environment or disease. We understand that Nazi's had a need to place the so called "Aryan" race above that of others and therefore need to address "intellectual" features. Unlike some other people, I don't let peoples titles and such distract me from the information they are presenting. Even the most virulently "racist" person can give valid information. Only a fool passes on information simply because they don't like the source. But that's not the point of the post.
Michael Fisher in his analysis of that statement went on to explain:
Clearly, on the face of it, the concept of “race” as a biological construct is completely illogical and arbitrary. The concept has nothing to do with reality. There is no such thing as a 1 ½ -inch-left-pinky-toe-having “race”. It just doesn’t exist. And that is despite the fact that there are probably millions of people who actually do have a left pinky toe of 1 ½ inches in length walking around.
Even if a biological "race" existed, to attribute pinky toe size as a racial feature is completely and utterly arbitrary. And so is any other attribute.
Hence came The Wager. I didn't even bother to read the rest of the post, and still have not, because Mr. Fisher clearly has an extremely loose grip on genetics. I told him so in the comments section:
Dude, your grip on genetics and inheritance is pretty weak which is completely undermining your argument. that opening quote is absolutely accurate regardless of it's source.
You continue to confuse social construct with genetics.
Now I'm not one to pick on people about grammar and punctuation because we all make mistakes and bad punctuation doesn't necessarily mean the overall idea is invalid. However; when an individual shows a complete mis-understanding of the subject at hand, it is difficult to take them very seriously. Michaelm insisting on believing himself to be correct continued to go on and on so I decided to put money on the table:
I've already done so on my blog, which I've linked to in a previous post, to which you hung out your "pinky toe" false argument.
but since you two are so "informed" you let me know the next time a Chinese woman and man pops out a near black skinned, "nappy headed", thick lipped" child and I'll personally sign you a $1,000 check AND take down my entire blog.
I'll write you another $1,000 cheque should you find a German Shephard[sic] that gives birth to a poodle[sic] through natural means of conception.
In fact lets up the ante. Should you be unable to find either of the above, you take down the entire blog entry and paypal me 10 bucks. I'm putting 2 grand and my entire blog against your single entry and 10 bucks.
How about it?
In fact I'll up it even more. I'll offer the challenge to ANYONE reading this blog entry. 1,000 bucks. to show what I asked above.
Provide verifiable photos and reference material and I'll cut you a $1,000 cheque.
He wanted to play dumb in regards to what a "chinese" person was and what "near black skinned" and "thick lipped" meant so I made a more specific post:
All I see is a bunch of Whoo haa and No documented evidence to the challenge I posed.
So let's cut to the chase: Proof as of Monday 9AM Eastern time or 10 bucks in my paypal account.
And in case anyone is confused:
1) SHow[sic] two German Shephards [sic]that concieve by natural means a Poodle.
2) show a case of two Chinese persons as typified by the image found here:
giving birth o a child with features Seen here:
I got this idea from John Grubur of the Daring Fireball website. When a hacker claimed to have hacked a MacBook,and Gruber said he was , in effect, full of shit, Gruber put his money where his mouth was and publicly stated that he would meet said hacker at the 5th Ave. Apple Store in NYC. Said hacker would merely have to show Gruber the hack and gruber would give up a brand spanking new MacBook and retract his critique. I had to respect Mr. Gruber on his willingness to put his money where his mouth was. So often on the internet, people will say and post all kinds of stuff, they really haven't thought out or really believe in. So I simply decided to put Michael to the test. I put my $1,000 to his 10 bucks. With 1,000 bucks to gain, I would think that he would have been able to produce what was asked for. Instead we got junk like this:
""Most of the population of modern China--one fifth of all people living today--owes it genetic origins to Africa."
--Los Angeles Times, Sep 29, 1998
sondjata, I think you might want to check out some of Bro. Runoko Rashidi's work.
The posted material was not even relevant to The Wager. The Wager was not about the origins of Chinese people (or German Shepherds) it was to show a chinese person, as pictured, procreating via natural means a child that as also pictured. The above comment deals with evolutionary history from African to Chinesem, a point that was never in dispute. That was not The Wager.
Equally another individual posted:
Since the term "Chinese" was used, I knew this was a wrap from Jump Street! The Rashidi files are far too deep for someone to actually something so silly. In any event, I better get a good look at this cat's blog because the whole thing should be gone by Monday night...then I can watch the game.
"African Presence in Early Asia takes down Eurocentric Scholars and Non-white Blogger - Story at 11."
I'm not sure what "Temple3" was referring to. I can only hope that "Temple3" is not a student of Molefe Asante at Temple university, as the above statement is the epitomy of arrogance and stupidity that unfortunately abounds among our so called "vanguard" of "black consciousness" and would reflect badly on the African studies department there.
In any event lets get to the crux of the matter. It's a particularly boring topic for me at this point because I've dealt with it extensively at least twice on this blog, but for the sake of The Wager, I'll deal with it once again.
A good many people in "black consciousness" circles, think that because they read a book, they understand what it is they read. Many times, their discussions of racism, etc, are verbatum repeats of that which they read. Sad but true. In any case, the newest thing on the block is the "There is no such thing as race" concept. It's a cute social notion that attempts to erase racism, by erasing race itself. The logic here is if race does not exist then racism is stupid. This is kind of Jr High logic. It's kind of like the "see no evil" concept. If I willfully ignore what's in front of me, then it doesn't exist (and the world is all good).
The recent basis for this claim is the product of the Human Genome project. In which it was found that people are 99.9% the same in genetic make up. The logic also goes that since we are so alike, we can't be different. Since the average American has not gotten past High School biology class ( only 25% of adults in the US currently have a college degree) and the few that have, have taken general biology in college they really are not in a position to really understand and dissect the information that these news reports in popular news prints actually mean. However; Somehow they see themselves as experts in the field (For the sake of disclosure my degree is in biology). So since most people have really no clue as to what these human genome project data means, I'll repeat my analysis of one of the latest reports on the subject. I wrote:
Well according to Francis Collins a new analysis of of the human genome reveals that there are between 20,000 and 25,000 genes in humans. .1 % of whic [sic] would be 2000 genes. That's a whole lot of genes given that a mutation in just one of them could result in something like sickle cell.
if [sic] we took the lower number of genes (20,000) the "difference" between "races" would be the equivalent to the genetic difference between humans and C. elegans, a worm or a mustard plant. So clearly the fact that humans are so genetically close does not absolve the fact that even such closelness can contain massive differences. And if that number doesn't tickle you, consider that there are 3 Billion + Chemicals that make up DNA and .1% of that is 3 million. That's a whole lot of difference.
Anyway let me get to the meat of the subject here. Instead of using the term "race" lets toss it as if it never existed. Also, instead of discussing humans, lets talk about dogs. Now when people are dealing with dogs, they have no problem talking about different breeds of dog. We see the film 101 Dalmations and no one says: "But they're all dogs!!". We see white dogs with black spots and we know we've seen a Dalmation. If we take a trip to the American Kennel Club (AKC): We find numerous pages on "breeds" of dog. Since I mentioned the German Shepherd here's the page for it:
Since I mentioned a Poodle, here's the page for it:
Both the German Shepherd and the Poodle have the same scientiic taxonomy:
So if they are of the same species (just like humans), why is it they can be classified by their looks?After all there all the same species right? Who cares if they can reproduce themselves, they are all dogs. Stop the dog racism! Let me point the reader to an article entitled: Genomic Differences Between Dog Breeds. It's a nice article which, if one is scientifically challenged, may be confusing so I'll point out the "plain english" portions for the reader:
This work demonstrates a significant amount of variation that you can see between individual dogs at the genomic level," says Kirkness, lead investigator of the project, funded by TIGR...
The dog is a unique genomics model. Through selective breeding of dogs, humans have created the highest degree of physical and behavioral differences seen within a species. Roughly 400 dog breeds exist, with specific breeds predisposed to heart disease, cancer, blindness, deafness and other common disorders. Identifying genes responsible for diseases or physical traits may be easier to do in dogs that have been genetically selected.
So these same scientists, who want to tell you and I that there are "no races" of humans will tell us about 400 "specific" breeds of dog even though all these dogs are of the same species. Shocking! How contradictory!
So getting back to The Wager, we have determined, with our dog example that animals of the same species can,in fact have physical properties that are determined by differing genes. So now why is it different with humans? Well it's not. Here is the lower end of the Taxonomy of humans:
Hominidae (great apes and human)
Pongo pygmaeus (orangutan)
Pongo pygmaeus abelii (Sumatran orangutan)
Pongo pygmaeus pygmaeus (Bornean orangutan)
Gorilla gorilla (gorilla)
Gorilla gorilla beringei (mountain gorilla)
Gorilla gorilla gorilla (lowland gorilla)
Gorilla gorilla graueri
Pan paniscus (pygmy chimpanzee)
Pan troglodytes (chimpanzee; common chimpanzee)
Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii
Pan troglodytes troglodytes
Pan troglodytes verus
Homo sapiens (human)
We are Homo sapiens sapiens.
Being animals with genes like all other animals we are subject to the same rules as any other animal. Of particular interest to The Wager is that we have certain traits that are observable and can be passed on to our progeny if that trait is determined by our genes. There are "obvious" traits like skin color, hair texture, eye shape and nose shape. If each of these traits were simply random occurences then we'd see the same exact population diversity everywhere.Nigeria would be full of blond headed people with straight, slightly curly, really curly and tight (N*@$! naps) hair. There would be red heads all over Nigeria too. Not only that, but Nigeria would be full of people with varied skin tones from the whitest to the "blackest". All the populations would be represented equally because any trait would equal and have an equal chance of showing up in offspring. In fact All over the world there would be equal populations of all types of people. Kind of like a NYC subway. But it's not.
No, instead we see that there are people in Africa that have the same general characteristics that is, very dark skin, wholly hair and general thick lips. There are currently areas in Africa where this generality does not hold. the reason for this is due to the history of invasion of North Africa and East Africa and the consequent interbreeding. Now how do we know that this is a particular race? Well let's go back to the dogs. Even though they are all of the same species, they are identifiable as a distinct sub group. This subgroup, no different than Poodles and German Shepherds will breed and reproduce themselves with progeny that have the same general physical characteristics just like two Poodles and two German Shepherds. Similarly in Europe you have light skinned people (light?). with straight hair and an interesting extreme: the blonde. The blonde is a known genetic recessive. blond hair and blue eyed people are genetic recessives that only show up when two people carrying these genetic traits (not necessarily blonde themselves) give both recessive traits to their offspring. Again, what is important here is that you don't have Europeans (AKA: white people) producing children that are typical of say, Nigeria. Not by a long shot. Oh, yes there is great variation within that group but there are clear limits on what they can produce on their own. In fact it is entirely possible that within these group variations are other sub species of humans that can reproduce themselves reliably.
Over on the other side of the Eurasian continent (just how do we justify calling a peninsula a continent?) we find people with characteristics of "bone straight" hair, light skin and "odd" shaped eyes. Again, we find that these traits are inheritable. Again we find that there are limits to what they can produce on their own. None will produce a child that looks like an average Yoruba.
You can basically do the same thing across the globe. What usually get's people confused are hybrids. This particular confusion is especially acute in places like the US where there is a social definition of "race" that is contradictory to genetics. So example in the US. anyone with "one drop" of African blood is "black" unless that African blood is sourced from North Africa. Got that? And "white" is anyone without any African blood, or "African blood" sourced from North Africa. Had that logic been applied to our German Shepherd example then had we bred a Poodle with a German Shepherd, the result would be a German Shepherd. Now the AKC wouldn't have it, but the social contruct of race as played out in the US if applied would make it so.
Now for me, I'm all for the dismantling of the social concept of race as is practiced in the US. In fact the scientific concept of race utterly destroys the social concept of race.
So in summary Michael Fisher, to be lauded for his desire to end the system of White Supremacy (as defined by Neely Fuller Jr. and expounded upon by the likes of Dr. Frances Cress Welsing), simply does a disservice to his comrads and the cause itself by putting out patently false information based on his complete lack of understanding of genetics and confusing the social concept of race with the genetic definition.
It is now 9:15 AM on Monday morning. No paypal deposit has reached my inbox so I'll have to assume then that Michael Fisher was unwilling to put his money where his mouth was. That really reflects badly on him.
Sunday, September 23, 2007
The NY Times has an interesting article on ol Satchmo :
“It’s getting almost so bad a colored man hasn’t got any country,” a furious Mr. Armstrong told him. President Eisenhower, he charged, was “two faced,” and had “no guts.” For Governor Faubus, he used a double-barreled hyphenated expletive, utterly unfit for print. The two settled on something safer: “uneducated plow boy.” The euphemism, Mr. Lubenow says, was far more his than Mr. Armstrong’s.
Mr. Armstrong bitterly recounted some of his experiences touring in the Jim Crow South. He then sang the opening bar of “The Star-Spangled Banner,” inserting obscenities into the lyrics and prompting Velma Middleton, the vocalist who toured with Mr. Armstrong and who had joined them in the room, to hush him up.
I play the piano and have been influenced by Satchmo. I've never really gone into his politics but was put off by his "black and blue" record in which he states: "I'm white inside, but that don't help my case." I really can't see how any self-respecting black person could make such a comment. I'm not sure whether that comment predates the quote above but it would be interesting to know.
Technorati Tags: Satchmo
Friday, September 21, 2007
Given some of the conversations I've had recently I think the readership ought to review my post entitled Note to the So Called POC Revolutionary:
Special enphasis on section 2:
2) "I know everything." No, you don't really say that, but you act like it. This is pretty closely related to number one above. What people with this problem do is act like everyone else is wrong and they are right. It spanks of arrogance and a lack of security in oneself. Think of the logic. No one person can know everything. Not even in the subject that interests them the most. So why act like you know everything? A sign of true leadership is admitting that one could be wrong AND admitting when one is wrong. Of course a large reason why people slip into this pit is because often there is a lack of leadership training among consciousness organizations. Often these organizations are simply places where everyone pats everyone else on the back rather than a place to further challenge their friends and ideas.
Thursday, September 20, 2007
I just read at the NY Times blog the following statement from DA Walter Reed:
truly wish I could have prosecuted. I searched the Louisiana statutes for an offense that fit that act, but it is simply not there.
It has been suggested that I charge the perpetrators of that noose hanging with a "hate crime." But in Louisiana law, a "hate crime" exists primarily as a sentencing enhancement to other crimes that have been proven. ... Similarly, the U.S. attorney searched the federal statutes for a crime with which to charge these people, but he, too, had to accept the fact as I did that there was none that could be proved.
This is a clear example of white supremacy in the United States. Back in the 1930's, Zoot Suits were banned by the Federal Government because it deemed the suits to use "extravagant of fabric." There were riots where US soldiers went about beating on Mexicans. Similarly we have cities that have gone out of their way to ban baggy pants and the like. Yet it never seemed to cross the minds of the legislators of LA that Hanging a noose ought to be a crime?
OK I can see how a blanket banning of noose hangings could cause problems. So it makes some sense that the noose hanging itself is not a crime. However; since, as OJ has found out, extortion an individual <i> is </i> a crime then why not charge those individuals with extortion to deny the civil rights of black students?
Here's a definition of Extortion:
Virtually all extortion statutes require that a threat must be made to the person or property of the victim. Threats to harm the victim's friends or relatives may also be included. It is not necessary for a threat to involve physical injury. It may be sufficient to threaten to accuse another person of a crime or to expose a secret that would result in public embarrassment or ridicule. The threat does not have to relate to an unlawful act. Extortion may be carried out by a threat to tell the victim's spouse that the victim is having an illicit sexual affair with another.
Other types of threats sufficient to constitute extortion include those to harm the victim's business and those to either testify against the victim or withhold testimony necessary to his or her defense or claim in an administrative proceeding or a lawsuit. Many statutes also provide that any threat to harm another person in his or her career or reputation is extortion.
Now follow me here. It is illegal to segregate public spaces or to prevent a person from enjoying a public space based on race. The act of reserving the "tree" was discriminatory. Furthermore once the nooses were hung that was a threat to deny the rightful use of the tree by the black students. So that is extortion. Furthermore, since at least 3 students acted in concert to threaten the black students with violence (that's hanging the noose) in order to segregate public property (illegal), then it is possible that they acted as a corrupt organization. Therefore it is also possible to bring RICO charges against all involved.
Would it stick? Can't say, but as we've seen with the OJ arrest, apparently we can simply arrest people, charge them later and extract a rather large amount of money out of them to go "free". Limit their movement and contact with the offended parties and have them pay for lawyers to defend themselves against the charges. All of this would have sent a nice signal to the community that hanging nooses is simply not worth the trouble.
But no, white students don't rank for that kind of treatment. They are sent home to "think about their actions". Black folk on the other hand are to tolerate the bull shit and have the book thrown at them when they decide not to. And since the prosecutor has discretion in charges to file, he could have easily decided to charge the boys with simple assault and told the parents that they ought to be grateful that any charges are being filed since they clearly fucked up raising there children to the extent that they thought noose hanging was OK.
But as usual, prosecutors can get all creative when it comes to charging black folk with crimes but draw blanks for Klan activity. Been that way since we've been here too.
And so the outing of Juanita Bynum continues at the NY Times. It's "funny" that this has been printed about now since I recently had it out with an individual over the mis-teachings that these so called "prophets" dole out. Most of whom have no clue of history, Biblical or otherwise. These folks are out to make more than a buck and millions of people gladly hand over their money. No more sheets? How about "no more cash". How about people stop paying these so-called "prophets" and see what they have to say when they can't make a buck off religion anymore?
Anyway. The article had some interesting things in it like:
In the seminars, she sermonized, “I don’t care what kind of husband you got, that’s your covenant vow, and you have a responsibility to make him feel like he’s a wonder when you know he ain’t.”
Nothing is worse than a fake ass woman. If a woman doesn't like her husband-to-be and married him anyway while making him think he was KIng of the Hill, he deserves to be cut loose from that fake ass woman. And I'll let you know how you know when you got a fake ass woman next to you. If at any point in the relationship you appear and she looks like she's got to get "prepared" to deal with you, you got a faker on your hands.
Then there's this piece:
But during the marriage, Ms. Bynum publicly focused on the duties of a Christian wife, counseling women to give their husbands plenty of sex and to ask them, “Do I please you?”
Check it out, If you need to ASK if your man is pleased, let there be no doubt in your mind that there is a problem. Unless the man has ED or is burnt out from overwork, If you're doing just about anything more than just laying on your back, he's pleased. And anyway, why is it all about him? Seriously, Sex is supposed to be pleasurable for both parties involved. A wife is not a whore. Whores are pleasure objects for men. Wives are pleasure partners of men.
Then there is this:
She later said there had been previous instances of “pushing and shoving” and that she wanted to “take some classes” to find out why she attracted abusive men.
Some pushing and shoving? You'll note that there was no statement of WHO was doing the pushing and shoving but since I've read elsewhere that it is entirely possible that the "prophet" has been doing pushing and shoving herself, not to mention some verbal abuse of her husband, I bet there is more to the story but because her husband hit her, that will all get brushed under the rug. And you'd think the "prophet" who is supposedly empowering all these women would have already dealt with the "why she's attracted to abusive men." Perhaps, yeah, just maybe, as I've seen in the past, she creates an atmosphere where tempers flare. Personally I think she ought to sit down and be silent until she's at least come to grips with her issues. Then I would suggest ol girl refrain from advice giving.
The final parting shot, which was perhaps the most "prophetic" thing she's said:
It kind of brought my head out of the sand of the church in that sense
Yep. A whole bunch of people have their heads in the church sand on far more issues than domestic abuse.
Too all honest, knowledge seeking Christian folk: If you see a "Preacher" in the best car, best clothes and best house, there's a problem. Many of these million dollar preachers are not scholars. Much of what is preached from the pulpits are directly contradicted by actual bible scholars and archeologists. Some of these preachers know the info but keep it from the congregation because they fear losing their jobs and offerings. You are being used.
[Update] I just stumbled on this right here:
"In every generation God raises up a revolutionary, a chief commander, a voice who's not afraid to cry loud on behalf of his people.
"We call her a prophetess of the nations who fills stadiums and changes lives...She ushers people into the presence and glory of god...Preacher, teacher, ambassador and entrepreneur Juanita Bynum."
Ms Bynum calls the money she demands from her supporters "sowing a seed". In one video on her site she pleads for $200,000 to build a new prayer room - which she calls a "threshing floor".
She says: "It's a hard thing for me, but I have to pick up everything and move it and there's a piece (of land) on the new Juanita Bynum ministry property God has given me - the 30 acres of land and 12 acres of lakefront.
"I think it is God's wisdom to build a new threshing floor here so I am asking you as my partners.
"The fee and the charge is approx $200,000 I am asking for an emergency seed, any seed you give $300, $500 or $1,000. You have an opportunity to help me build the place where I can go to God on your behalf."
And apparently people are dumb enough to send her their money.
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
I'm not really an OJ fan. Wasn't one before the whole murder case and not really one now. But this recent thing is bothering me.
First off, why is there an audio tape of the whole thing? Doesn't that cause anyone to take pause? I mean really, how many people who are going to commit a crime bring audio recorders in order to create evidence that would put them away? To me this seems like a set up. The NY Times seems to agree:
the ex-wife of one of the suspects says it’s actually quite common for folks around the football great and former murder defendant to have a tape rolling.
“Many people carry recorders around him to see if they can catch him slipping to make money,” said Debbie Alexander, 41, former wife of Walter Alexander, 46, of Mesa, Arizona.
While the man who made this latest recording, Thomas Riccio, earned an undisclosed sum by selling his tape to TMZ.com, Ms. Alexander said that he was probably hoping for something related to the 1994 double murder of his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ronald Goldman.
So we know now that there are people surrounding OJ who are looking to make a buck off him by either getting him into, or folowing him into trouble.
Turns out this Riccio person has been granted immunity from prosecution for turning over the tape.
Now supposedly OJ did not have any guns on him during the alleged robbery. So if he didn't have one, then that means his supposed accomplices did. Why is it that these accomplices are not being charged? Where are these people? Something is not right here.
Another issue I have is regarding the sports memorabilia persons. Supposedly OJ claims that they had his material that they may or may not have had the right to have. Has anyone tried to determine whether or not the material was in fact legally in their possession? I would think that one cannot be charged with robbery if one is attempting to recover your own property. I mean if I got car jacked and shot the person who jacked me and recovered my vehicle I don't get charged for murder. Similarly if my car is stolen and I then find someone in possesion of my vehicle and I get it back by throwing the person who has my vehicle out of my car, I don't get charged with car jacking because it's my property. So I want to know whether or not the police have determined whether or not the material that OJ was supposedly robbing actually legally belonged to the alleged victims.
Surely if OJ thought he had been robbed he should have called the police, but my understanding is that whenever OJ calls the police, he is not taken seriously. If that is the case, then OJ may have felt, justifiably that he needed to take matters into his own hands.
I don't know if OJ can afford to get a good lawyer now that he's been tapped for millions but I would think that this case may not turn out to be the slam dunk the prosecution thinks it is.
The NY times posted an article regarding a school rezoning plan which may or may not be a case of legalized racial segregation:
After white parents in this racially mixed city complained about school overcrowding, school authorities set out to draw up a sweeping rezoning plan. The results: all but a handful of the hundreds of students required to move this fall were black — and many were sent to virtually all-black, low-performing schools.
Question: Were any of the black parents concerned about this supposed overcrowding? Was the question even asked? It's important.
Black parents have been battling the rezoning for weeks, calling it resegregation. And in a new twist for an integration fight, they are wielding an unusual weapon: the federal No Child Left Behind law, which gives students in schools deemed failing the right to move to better ones.
An interesting tactic, but one I'm going to ignore right now since it doesn't really matter here.
Tuscaloosa, where George Wallace once stood defiantly in the schoolhouse door to keep blacks out of the University of Alabama, also has had a volatile history in its public schools. Three decades of federal desegregation marked by busing and white flight ended in 2000. Though the city is 54 percent white, its school system is 75 percent black.
Now that 54-75 split is very interesting. As I discussed earlier in my posting on the recent US Supreme Court ruling:
Again, the issue at hand was equal protection under the 14th amendment. Not diversity. Not anything else. Equal protection. Legally sending black students to black schools due simply to their race was a denial of due process and equal protection. That also meant that sending white students to a school simply because they are white is ALSO a denial of equal protection. The ruling cut both ways....
An optional majority-to-minority transfer provision has long been recognized as a useful part of a desegregation plan, and to be effective such arrangement must provide the transferring student free transportation and available space in the school to which he desires to move. Pp. 26-27.
You will note that the "majority" student must "desire" to move. The case recently decided was clearly about students (and parents) who did NOT desire to be transported.
So we have to keep in mind that it is apparent that a good percentage of white parents have been opting out of the public school system which resulted in:
During court-ordered desegregation its schools roughly reflected the school system’s racial makeup, and there were no all-black schools.
That would imply that the schools were 75% black. The recent changes to the system created three general districts that created one school that maintained the "racial balance" another school that was 99% black and another that is "majority white" with a high school with a 54% black population. Another important question is what is "majority white?" Clearly something has been done in order to drop the black population in the schools to where whites could be the majority in any part of the system.
But the real problem rears it's head once again: Economics. It is simply unconstitutional to tell people where they can and cannot live. It is clear from the report that the majority white schools are also the ones in the most affluent areas. It is also clear that the majority black schools are in poor areas. It is no doubt that the clamoring by the black parents to have their children sent to the white school is to get access to the better schools (even though new High Schools were built in each area). It would seem to be prudent to ask why, after 50 years a school that is 99% black is a school that is underperforming? Why after 50 years, black students are still expected to have to leave their neighborhoods in order to receive a quality education?
I'll reiterate my position on the matter. There needs to be a complete change in how public school systems are funded. funding ought to be either distributed equally across all school districts or in proportion to the students attending school in each district. funding schools based on property taxes guarantees an unequal system of education.
Monday, September 17, 2007
I've made this mini poster for those of us not able to make it out to Jena LA. on Sept. 20th. I'll be posting mine on my office door. If you are so inclined or have the opportunity you can download the PDF file here. Print it out and hang it up too.
[update] The above poster, now residing on my office door, has informed a number of people on the matter. The noose is what brought them in. If you can, download and post it.
Technorati Tags: Jena 6
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
So the Philly online report on the black woman that was held hostage and abused by 6 white people (male and female) I read this:
Carmen Williams said Tuesday from her daughter's room at Charleston Area Medical Center General Hospital. "I didn't know there were people like that out here."
WAKE THE EFF UP!!
That goes for her and all you head in the sand, "lets all just get along" NEGROES who get all "shocked" when this type of stuff goes down.
All you need to do is do an internet search and you will find all kinds of white folks with their pictures on the sites, displaying their guns and doing "Hail Hitler" salutes for every damn body to look at. And these MOFO's go to school with you and your kids. They work at YOUR JOB and many of these folk are in high paying jobs and are educated as hell.
WAKE THE EFF UP!!
Citizens, do not have the option of ignoring a police request to stop, be it at the capitol building or on a highway. This is where McKinney went wrong. Not only that, but as a representative, she is a role model for millions of black people in the US. It is not a good idea to get black people, specifically black men, the idea that it is OK to get into a physical altercation with a police officer...The situation in the case of the Jena Six is exactly what I was thinking about when I wrote those words. Knowing that police will fuck around with duly elected officials, we'd have to be deaf, dumb and blind to not have seen what was coming when these young men went after the white student in question.
Also, by lashing out in anger(?) she may signal that it is OK to use violence to resolve problems. Perhaps, deep down she does. I'm not morally opposed to that point. I do think that for what McKinney has been sent by her constituents to do, violence is off the table.
I have to keep in mind that which I said during the Duke Lacrosse team was put in the spotlight. I knew then that the evidence simply did not add up and that reasonable doubt would prevail. Not that I liked the Duke players, or disliked the young lady involved. I simply looked at the case as an outsider. Similarly I see the same thing here.
From what I understand, nooses notwithstanding, the individuals involved at the very least premeditated aggravated assault on the student in question. So lets make sure we don't get besides ourselves with the charges and questions of guilt. Furthermore, while an issue in a larger context, what some silly white man got a different sentence for over his actions is irrelevant to a jury trial. Let's get it straight, from the evidence, the boys are guilty as charged. Now the issue is, that we are asking for, legitimately in my opinion, is for the sentencing to be put aside, or some sort of pardon be given. That is, we know full well they beat the kid's ass. What we are suggesting is that there are extenuating circumstances that should allow the courts to deal differently with this particular case.
It is a indication of the sad state of Jena LA. that white students in 2007 believe that they "own" a tree simply because they are white. That in and of itself is a rank condemnation of the parents AND the school system that apparently had no clue that such persons were in attendance of that school and carrying on with such things. That is a level of indignity that could have been dealt with by the community and school, had the administration and parents had a clue. Indeed it would appear that since this was a "known" thing by black students at the school, the black students had been pretty "nice" in the face of such an affront to their basic humanity and citizenry. I tip my hat to the students for tolerating such bullshit without fisticuffs for such a long time. The court needs to be informed with the strongest language possible, that the students showed great restraint for having to suffer the indignity of being told, in whatever fashion, that they "could not" sit under this particular tree simply because of their biology. The court should be made aware that in other parts of the country, any white student that attempted such nonsense would probably had been beat down for being dumb enough to have made that a conscious thought.
But what is most insulting, and hence what makes the act of violence negated by mitigating circumstances, was that the white students felt so bold as to put nooses on the tree. As far as I am concerned, and I can safely say that I speak for any number of black folk, any white person who posts a noose in my presence is threatening me. Nooses and burning crosses have a special place in American history and are not to be trifled with.
If one looks at various white supremacist websites you will find all kinds of white students of varied ages and of both genders who are committed to wiping blacks off the US map. On these sites they post pictures of themselves with varied firearms. They often have Nazi flags in the picture and some even do the 'Hail Hitler" salute. Since some of these types are the ones who end up bringing firearms to schools and shooting up the "Jocks and Niggers" I would say that the Jena Six had legitimate reason to believe that they were in danger. Since the racial intimidation had already been raised by the white students from "exclusion" to clear historical references to racial violence, they students probably felt that they needed to make a "statement" to let the white students involved know that they would not be intimidated and would no longer be victimized by this high school lynch mob.
So while I may disagree with how they went about protecting themselves from this would be lynch mob, this is a clear case of mitigating circumstances. The court would do well to send a message to all adolescent, wanna be lynch mobbers and segregationists, by either dropping the charges, commuting the sentences and.or a straight pardon.
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
So I'm reading about the arrest of Rev. Lennox Yearwood by Capitol Hill Police:
Rev. Yearwood was stopped from entering the room, while others behind him were allowed to enter. He told the officers blocking his ability to enter the room, that he was waiting in line with everyone else and had the right to enter as well. When they threatened him with arrest he responded with "I will not be arrested today." According to witnesses, six capitol police, without warning, "football tackled him. He was carried off in a wheel chair by DC Fire and Emergency to George Washington Hospital.
Rev. Yearwood was examined for possible head and leg injuries then transferred to Central Processing. He has been charged with "assaulting a police officer."
And I'm thinking: So all these people who called former rep. Cynthia McKinney all kinds of things for not willing to be assaulted by Capitol Hill Police, I bet they still think she's crazy. So just so we understand, Oh 40 odd years ago, black folk could get knocked out, water hosed and have dogs sicced on them for protesting Now black folk can be knocked out, tackled and have limbs broken for protesting. Exactly what has changed again? Oh that's right we can lay up with pink toes, sit at a counter and live in white neighborhoods (before they become "formally white" neighborhoods.).
Sunday, September 09, 2007
So the NY Times posts an article in it's Sunday Magazine about Freud and religion wherein we find the following:
Freud also said that monotheism was not a Jewish but an Egyptian invention, descending from the cult of the Egyptian sun god Aton.
This is a popular concept and is based on the short lived religious upheaval by Akhenaten who attempted to wrest control from the priests of Amen. Important distinction because...
About two-thirds of the way into the volume, he makes a point that is simple and rather profound — the sort of point that Freud at his best excels in making. Judaism’s distinction as a faith, he says, comes from its commitment to belief in an invisible God, and from this commitment, many consequential things follow. Freud argues that taking God into the mind enriches the individual immeasurably. The ability to believe in an internal, invisible God vastly improves people’s capacity for abstraction.
See we need to get back to that Amen. See the supreme God in Khemetic (Egyptian) religion was Amen-Ra. Ra being God and Amen meaning hidden one. So in fact the Egyptians are the inventors of the "invisible" God and Judaism merely bit the concept. The problem with the latter religion, including Christianity and Islam is the failure to understand the concept of symbolism. All those "idols" are not 'gods" they are representative of some natural force. They are points of focus no less than people who wear crosses don'r actually worship the cross.
Thursday, September 06, 2007
It is no great secret that people have much invested in their religion of choice. It's usually best to not even broach the subject with anyone but the most informed or most open. So a "friend" (who may find herself minus one) decided to discuss a sermon given at her church last Sunday. Apparently the good reverend decided to discuss "debt" or something along those lines. Apparently he discussed people who have lexuses which "friend" has and was upset over being apparently singled out. There's an old saying that the one who bawl is the one pinched. or something along those lines. This discussion lead to one of my issues with many organized religions: prosperity preaching. Don't like it or it's implications. For those unfamiliar with, prosperity preaching is when one basically teaches that should you follow the Bible you will be rewarded with not only riches in heaven but also on earth. unfortunately a great deal of people who ascribe to this philosophy get to the point where they believe that riches are proof of "living right". Of course then, if one is poor or otherwise "struggling" then that person is "lazy", "doing wrong", etc. Now I'm not saying that said "friend" was of the type to think that, but I did level the objection with the example of Reverend Run the Hip Hop reverend.
For those unfamiliar, Rev. Run owns a rather "nice" home in Saddle River NJ. He has a rather "nice" Rolls" and he and his wife spend lavishly on home furnishings. The explanation given when people question this, is that as noted above, God blesses. Well OK.
I pointed out to "friend" Matthew 19:24. I'll extend the story since it's relevant:
16And behold, there came a man up to Him, saying, Teacher, what excellent and perfectly and essentially good deed must I do to possess eternal life?(C)
17And He said to him, Why do you ask Me about the perfectly and essentially good? There is only One Who is good [perfectly and essentially]--God. If you would enter into the Life, you must continually keep the commandments.
18He said to Him, What [d]sort of commandments? [Or, which ones?] And Jesus answered, You shall not kill, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness,(D)
19Honor your father and your mother, and, You shall love your neighbor as [you do] yourself.(E)
20The young man said, I have observed all these from my youth; what still do I lack?
21Jesus answered him, If you would be perfect [that is, [e]have that spiritual maturity which accompanies self-sacrificing character], go and sell what you have and give to the poor, and you will have riches in heaven; and come, [f]be My disciple [side with My party and follow Me].
22But when the young man heard this, he went away sad (grieved and in much distress), for he had great possessions.
23And Jesus said to His disciples, Truly I say to you, it will be difficult for a rich man to get into the kingdom of heaven.
24Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to go into the kingdom of heaven.
25When the disciples heard this, they were utterly puzzled (astonished, bewildered), saying, Who then can be saved [[g]from eternal death]?
26But Jesus looked at them and said, With men this is impossible, but all things are possible with God.(F)
27Then Peter answered Him, saying, Behold, we have left [our] all and have become [h]Your disciples [sided with Your party and followed You]. What then shall we receive?
28Jesus said to them, Truly I say to you, in the new age [the [i]Messianic rebirth of the world], when the Son of Man shall sit down on the throne of His glory, you who have [become My disciples, sided with My party and] followed Me will also sit on twelve thrones and judge the twelve tribes of Israel.
29And anyone and everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands for My name's sake will receive [j]many [even a hundred] times more and will inherit eternal life.
30But many who [now] are first will be last [then], and many who [now] are last will be first [then].
My point in bringing up this particular passage was that if one is claiming to be a follower of Christ, then the above applies. Now would Rev, Run put give up the Rolls, and mansion to "follow Christ"? I can't speak for him. In my opinion, since Jesus wasn't rich and rolled on a donkey (symbolic I know), then Reverends, Popes, etc. ought not to either. Sell the mansion and the rolls, get a nice modest home and a Honda Accord and put the rest of the money to charity. No, I don't think that Christians or anyone else for that matter ought to be broke, I do think that materialism cloaked in "holy-isms" is still materialism.
But this wasn't really the problem I had with the conversation. The actual problem I had with the conversation was that I was told that since I don't "believe" I was not qualified to have a "correct" point on the matter or any biblical matter. Excuse me? Not saying I had to be right, but since "friend" wasn't even familiar with the verse in question (supposedly) how does being a "believer" make anyone more "qualified" than anyone else? What counts is study. Period.
"Friend" had attempted to counter with Deuteronomy 28 namely:
1IF YOU will listen diligently to the voice of the Lord your God, being watchful to do all His commandments which I command you this day, the Lord your God will set you high above all the nations of the earth.
Which I countered by pointing out that that was a historical document and was not a reference to YOU the individual but "You" the "Israelite" nation. The proof of that being played out in the rest of the old testament. Now some people choose to interpret that particular passage personally. That's their business and of course they are free to do so. That does not mean that the writing was not in fact written historically in reference to Israel. This brought up the issue of "interpretation". I was told that since I was a "non-believer" I was not qualified to "interpret" that passage or any other passage. Nor could I choose to throw out the Old Testament or parts of it to "suit myself." I pointed out that the Bible to which she ascribes to had already been "picked over" and that Bible Scholars all know it and so does any Reverend with scholarly credentials. She says that's Mans work and between God and them. So I said that apparently it's not that I can't "interpret" because I "don't believe" I'm simply not on the approved list of "interpreters." Then she asked if I read the "missing books". I had and told her much of them are available in the library.
At that point the conversation ended. I've said that I don't have a vested interest in any particular "interpretation" of Judeo-Christian" literature, because I don't get paid to do so. I don't have books to sell, offering plates to pass around. So really I'm a much better source than someone who needs to stay on a particular line for the sake of their livelihood.
Anyway. I'm going to have to stop being nice to my people. Next time someone tries to bring up religion I'm going to have to declare that if they haven't read the Book of Coming Forth by Day, the Husia, or familiar with Odu Ifa, that they are simply not qualified to have a conversation about religion with me. Some say 'respect my gangster" I say: Respect my intelligence.
Technorati Tags: Christianity
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
Tuesday, September 04, 2007
As Michael Vick is learning, White folks love their dogs.
Helmsley left her beloved white Maltese, named Trouble, a $12 million trust fund, according to her will, which was made public Tuesday in surrogate court.
She also left millions for her brother, Alvin Rosenthal, who was named to care for Trouble in her absence, as well as two of four grandchildren from her late son Jay Panzirer -- so long as they visit their father's grave site once each calendar year.
Mind you there are schools in NY that could use the money for supplies and such. Oh and I can think of a few people in New Orleans, or who used to live in New Orleans, that could have used that money. But I mean hey, What's a school and poor people got on a Maltese?
Heck I'm sure some of the house cleaning crew could have used a few bucks.
Over at my other blog, So and Such I posted on the growing pollution problem in China. I hadn't thought about it at the time but given the amount of industrial development being done in Africa by Chinese companies one would have to wonder what pollution issues Africa will have should the Chinese continue to be the development partner of choice. If the Chinese care so little about their own population's ability to breath clean air, one would have to wonder if they would care about Africans ability to do the same.