World N!gg@ Law.

When you travel abroad, they got world nigga law.
some folks get on a plane to go where they please,
but I go overseas and I get over sees!

-Mos Def
"Mr. Nigga."

So reading the Toronto Star from a link from Black Electorate, I find that Malik Shabazz of the New Black Panther Party has been blocked from entering Canada because of a "five-year-old misdemeanour offence."

Now I'm going to be "fair" and note that Canada and the US have laws on the books that will bar the entry of persons with certain criminal backgrounds. Just the other day I was reading about some white professor who had tried LSD during research at a college and was barred entry into the US (or Canada) because the border agent googled his name and found an article in which he discussed his LSD use. Never mind that it was 30 years ago. The man was refused entry. Since 9-11 stuff like this has been going down. I'm not clear as to what the misdemeanour is and none of the reports that I've read so far have said what it is.

[Update] I don't follow Hip Hop concerts but as at least 2003, the Canadian Government saw fit to allow 50 Cent into canada to perform. I don't need to remind the readership that 50 has a criminal record. Furthermore it is written that:

Volpe's spokesman, Steven Heckbert, said permits allowing those with criminal records to enter Canada are issued regularly.

"It's permission that's granted typically about 12,000 times a year," Heckbert told the Canadian Press.


So I would presume that Negroes talkin' guns, bitches and hos are OK by Canada.

[/update]

What has gotten attention are statements made by the group that had arranged for Dr. Shabazz's appearance:

"What is to blame is the power of the Jewish lobby to influence politicians, to influence media, to influence whatever," said Nkem Anizor, president of the radical new Toronto group Black Youth Taking Action.

This statement illicited a response from one Jewish organization:

"The attempt to blame the Jews speaks volumes," Canadian Jewish Congress chief executive Bernie Farber said of Anizor's remarks.

"It is clear to us now that this was not just an invitation given out without thinking," he said in an interview. "This (Toronto) group, we believe sadly, makes common cause with the anti-Semitic views of Mr. Shabazz."

This of course is par for the course. You'll note that Bernie Farber claimed that the Black Youth Taking Action group attempted to blame Jewish people, en masse when the statement was pretty clear that it was directed at the "Jewish lobby" which any intelligent person knows:

a) does not represent all Jewish people and can be questioned as to whether they represent the majority of Jews anywhere and therefore:
b) The Jewish lobby cannot be synonymous with all Jewish people.

But small details such as that aren't important to the media.

The Toronto Sun also had an article in which we find the following:

black activist mob yesterday.

It's a "Jewish conspiracy," was one of the many anti-Semitic slurs.

It's the result of "white supremacy," was another common theme.

They are "enslaved by the enslavers' children" and "to hell with diversity." Do you want to hear more nonsense from a group claiming to be running an Education not Incarceration campaign?


I love how the relatively small gathering was referred to as a "mob". It's always "nice" to see white folk throw the word "mob" around when it comes to black people gathering. I mean really now, I'm pretty well read. I understand that mob can be used in "benign" ways such as "flash mob" which is a large group of people who converge on a location from a cell phone call to do something and then disperse. But we know full well that mob was used here in it's most negative connotation of "irresponsible" and potentially "dangerous" black people.

The next piece of foolishness is the supposed "slur" of "Jewish Conspiracy". I mean we all know that to claim that there is a Jewish lobby of any sort with any kind of power is a "slur". Unless of course it is the Prime Minister of Israel saying it. Right.

Moving along, we find this nice piece:

"It serves only as a divisive force limiting our effectiveness to fight the real and pressing issues of systemic racism, black on black violence, and the lack of economic opportunities plaguing the black community," said Rev. Don Meredith of the GTA Faith Alliance in a statement put out by B'nai Brith Canada.

"As responsible black community leaders we join with B'nai Brith in urging our federal and provincial leaders to work in tandem to ensure New Black Panther leader Malik Zulu Shabazz does not have opportunity to spew hatred in Canada."

So what we have here are "responsible" black leaders. We know where THAT term comes from, but for those not in the know, whenever the white power structure needed a black face to cool out the "angry black mobs" they found someone, usually a Reverend, to be the black face that told everyone to cool out and how the "outside agitators" are only bringing discord into the peaceable community and upsetting the good white folk who have and are doing so much to help us "cullud folks". Different time, Different country, Same junk. Had the "responsible negroes" up in Toronto, been real black men and women, they would have first and foremost been upset that it is possible that legal excuses were made in order to stifle free speech. They would also have had an issue with outside, non-black organizations feeling that they can dictate what black folk should and should not listen too. Them days supposed to be done.

But most curiously, the above quotation makes it pretty clear that there is a plan or determination by at least one Jewish-identified organization to use it's influence in the government to stiffle the free association of black people thereby confirming the supposed "anti-semetic" comment made by the Toronto youth group.

Now I have my disagreements with Dr. Shabazz and I may not have been so moved to attend his presentation, but I damn sure am not going to have outside groups tell me what I can and cannot listen to. Furthermore, I will not allow Jewish organizations dictate to me what is and is not "anti-semetic" and I defintely will not be getting up on stage with such a group to lay a blanket condemnation on another black person committed to uplifting black people and the use of legal means to do so.

I hope that Minister Faust over at the Bro-Log will post some reports from other media sources.

Technorati Tags: Black Crime, Black Panther Party, Canada, governance, politics

Hating Sharpton

I've been feeling this for a while now. It reared it's head during the last presidential election and since the Imus situation and the acquital of the Duke Lacrosse players it has shown up again: Sharpton Hating (tm).

What is Sharpton Hating? it' pretty clear. People hate Sharpton (and Jesse Jackson) because they show up when black people are insulted, threatened, etc. Sharpton takes the risk of being wrong by speaking out. Whereas you and I, work for someone else and have to put up with various insults and the like, Sharpton (and Jesse) don't work for anyone and are free to call spades, spades. In other words, they make their living, by and large by being there when racist stuff happens.

The Sharpton Haters feel that since Sharpton makes his living in such a manner that he the the reason racism is alive and well in America. By their logic, the reason racism exists in America today is because Sharpton and Jesse create it in order to make their living. Good one right? Now I'm not dumb enough to think that there aren't people who are so pathological as to want to make up slights for their own benefit. It happens. But I'm not feelin' that about Sharpton at all.

It bothers me that someone who made his living running up and down a wooden court and is on record making seriously derogatory remarks about black women, would even be considered a credible critic of someone who has been standing up for black people. it bothers me that sports writers, who make their living writing about people who make their living entertaining people by throwing, dribbling and hitting balls, feel they have something credible to say on what Sharpton is or is not doing. It especially bothers me because should any one of these types of people were to get shot at, or discriminated against, Sharpton would be the first person there to back them up.

It really is the case of most of these Sharpton Haters, that they are mad because relatively speaking, Sharpton is a free man. By a free man, I mean he can say what is on his mind about the state of America, without much fear of reprisal. He doesn't have to call anyone
"nappy headed hos" or hire people to make "race jokes". He doesn't have to trade on stereotypes or anything like that. Say what you want about Sharpton. Say anything you like, but the one thing that cannot be said is that he's a liar (We can debate the merits of the Tawana Brawley thing elsewhere). I have never seen Sharpton, in a debate where he has been caught lying.

The other component to this Sharpton Hating, is that many of those who are hating on Sharpton are doing so based on the reports by the same people that he exposes. How often is it that I hear black commentators talking about how Sharpton is a hypocrite for not going after MC's for using profane language. Anyone who has followed Sharpton knows full well he has been speaking out about such language, yet the same commentators are nowhere near the events where these things happens. There is no news in Sharpton talking about those things.

Certain black commentators have also tried to say that Sharpton has not addressed black on black crime. This is another completely false critique. I expect these kinds of critiques from white people. But the growing number of black talking heads and writing hands, have engaged in the Sharpton Hating. I can only surmise that these ill-informed people are acting, as usual, at the behest of some white "cheque writer" somewhere up the food chain. After all, as pointed out in the sound track below. Denigrating other black people will surely get you paid. Apparently there is a market for toms too.

Apparently to these Sharpton Haters, Red lining, mass unemployment of black men in places like NYC, predatory lending and corporate control and prostitution of Hip Hop is all the work of Sharpton. Yes, Sharpton is to blame for the Duke Lacross players waving brooms at strippers. Sharpton is responsible for the marginalization of conscious Hip Hop (which is not always clean Hip Hop). Yes, Sharpton is responsible for police misconduct and the drug dealers on your corner. Sharpton is why there's so many murders in Newark. Heck, while we're at it, why not blame the whole Iraq war on Sharpton.

So when you start seeing the Sharpton Haters running off at the mouth, or keyboard, recall who they work for, worked for or where their larger interests lay. Doesn't mean Sharpton is above critique, but the blatant hating directed his way: Suspect as hell.

Technorati Tags: Al Sharpton

Market 4 N!gg@z

For those unawares there is a video over on YouTube by Talaam Acey entitled "Market 4 Niggaz". I enjoy Talaam Acey's work and decided to do a remix of that piece. hear it below:

Market 4 Niggaz
Poem: Talaam Acey
Music Arrangement: Sondjata "Mista" Olatunji

Justices Gone Wild

Recently the US Supreme Court has made some decisions that I have found to be so disturbing that I have come to believe that the mental affliction that President George Bush has, is in fact highly contagious. The first decision was the one in which the Justices, none of whom are medical doctors or experts in the field decided that so called "partial birth abortions" are illegal. Well no, actually that a state ban on such actions are constitutional. Now this should bother everyone and in my opinion should not be framed as an abortion issue. Prior to this event, we have the Terri Shiavo case in which members of the US congress sought to pass a law based on their opinion that Terri Shiavo should not be taken off of life support. Much of this clear meddling in the personal medical life of both Terri and her rightful guardian, was based on the religious moral values of the members of congress that came out. If nothing else serves as a shining example of the reason for a separation of religion and the state, the Terri Shiavo case was it.

It was unfortunate that the Iraq war became the center of focus for much of the election news during the last election. Even though the Iraq war is a very important issue, I thought that this feeling that congressmen and women thought they could invade the private life of a citizen in order to determine what medical procedure should or should not be performed was a gross violation of the constitutional rights of US Citizens by one of the very bodies responsible for upholding said constitution.

So it came as little surprise to me that the Supreme Court would get in on the action. Reports said that the courts majority decision was that the Congress has the right to pass laws that they saw fit and to ban procedures they find reprehensible. There are a lot of things people don't agree with. For example I have no wish to be a vegetable. I have no wish to be live paralyzed from the neck down. I would like for my loved ones to be able to end life support under those circumstances. There are people who do not agree with that. I say that is perfectly fine for them. THEY shouldn't make such decisions but they do not have the right to dictate to me what manner of life I should live or what medical conditions I should be forced to "live through". In the case of the partial abortion ban, the justices put their personal, religious, etc. opinions over that of the medical establishment (with it's own faults) and experts in the field. While partial birth abortions may be rare, the fact of the matter is that some situation may arise where it may need to be done as the best procedure to protect the life of the mother. By using the language the court is reported to have used, it is only a matter of time before other abortive acts become "reprehensible" and therefore subject to congressional banning. Eventually we will see a situation where doctors would be unable to induce an abortion to save a mother until some other medical threat appears (often worse than the initial reason the woman showed up in the hospital). The NY Times had an article on that very situation in a South American country last year.

The next dumb decision made by the court was in regard to police chases. When they reported on it, ABC News noted that 30% of the victims of vehicle chases are innocent civilians. The issue at hand was the danger that such cases pose to the general public.. That 30% number clearly showed that police chases are a danger to the public. What I haven't seen is a report that shows how often criminals that escape car chases are caught later. Nor have I seen the percentages of captures when there is no chase involved. In other words what is the clearance rate for crimes that involved vehicles but not police pursuits. Is it possible to catch the criminal without the initial pursuit? If so shouldn't, for the safety of the public, there be restrictions on the conditions under which a pursuit will be undertaken? After all, given that most criminals in vehicles do not want to bring attention to themselves and want to survive to enjoy the spoils of their crime; wouldn't they be more likely to not speed, crash, dodge and weave and do those things that can get civilians killed? And if the ultimate purpose of policing is to keep the public safe, then why is a 30% civilian casualty rate acceptable but not a rarely performed abortion procedure?

Shiavo posts:
http://garveys-ghost.blogspot.com/2005/03/terri-kicking-horse-some-more-i-was.html
http://garveys-ghost.blogspot.com/2005/03/insanity-of-it-all-today-i-read-op-ed.html
http://garveys-ghost.blogspot.com/2005/03/teri-shiavo-and-you-even-though-most.html

Technorati Tags: critique, privacy, Supreme Court, US Constitution

Ishamel Reed Breaks it D.O.W.N

Yesterday I read Ishmael Reed's excellent take down of white and black media pundits who have been trying to big themselves up by attacking black people via Hip Hop and the repeated slander of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. I usually take key quotes from articles and comment on them but the piece was so HARD, so TIGHT that all I can do is point you to it. Well OK ONE quote:

Imus also set himself up as the arbiter about whom black men should date. Of course, the majority of blacks have some European heritage--my mother has Irish-American ancestors on both her mother and father's side. But black people didn't become a Creole nation as a result of black men and white women having sex. Indeed, the first deadbeat dad of an African-American household was almost certainly English, Irish, or Scots-Irish. Both Frederick Douglass and Booker T. Washington's white slave-owning fathers had nothing to do with them. And though some black men are abusive to their families, I don't know of any who have sold their own children for profit.

What whaaaat!!



Go here:http://counterpunch.org/reed04242007.html

Technorati Tags: Al Sharpton, Conservatism, critique

Double Standards by the Numbers

So last week I attended a presentation given by some university students on the black woman. The point of the program was to discuss how black women went from being queens to being ho's and what should be done about it. The moderator of the event made a point that really should have been at the center of the discussion, that we should ask what is going on in the minds of men and women in black communities that they look at each other as pimps and ho's. Unfortunately this point was missed in the ensuing discussion about Buffy The Body, tight clothing and titles of porn films.

This was unfortunate because I saw a pronounced current of a need to control womens bodies. As if Buffy the Body posing in whatever she chooses to is THE problem or even A problem. One of the ironic points that came up was that one of the young women giving the presentation was wearing form fitting clothing and she's not a stick. I didn't have a problem with it. She didn't have a problem with it, but an audience member did find it contradictory that she was critiquing people in tight clothing while she herself was doing the same. Her explanation was that since her flash wasn't exposed it was acceptable. That's a pretty laughable point because it veers into a discussion of who is allowed to draw the line as to what is acceptable and what is not. But that's not really the point of this post.

The real problem I had with this discussion as well as the fallout from the Imus situation is the habit that many people, blacks included tend to stereotype black people based on the actions of a very few people. What is most startling about this situation is that other people are involved in the exact same behavior and are not called to account for their race for that behavior. Let me begin with "video ho's" as they are "affectionately" called.

There are supposedly 33 to 35 million black people in America. Lets say that 1/2 of them are women. If we take that assumption then we can say that there are around 17 million black females in the US. How many videos with black women shaking what their mammas gave them are there in current rotation. I'm not asking how often they are shown but how many of them are out. 100? 200? 1000?. How many women are in the videos? That is how many different women are in the total number of videos? 20? 50? 100? Assuming the largest number of unique black women in "booty shake" videos we could say that there are 100,000 unique black "booty shakers" in total max. That would be .5% of the total population of black women. So the question is why does 99.5% of black womanhood have to even explain themselves for the .5%? Why are we so fixated on the lives of these women? On the other hand there are girls gone wild videos, desperate housewives, and daytime soaps that show white women getting laid left right and center and yet no one even THINKS to either call these "actresses" ho's or to have various leaders explain how they don't reflect white womanhood in general. No it is assumed and expected that those white women who choose to show their breasts at spring break or whatever only reflect themselves (to an extent).

Since the young women in the presentation brought up porn, let me address that one. The largest population currently "starring" in porn are white women. But I will ask the question again; while the industry is a $2 billion one, how many actual "stars" are there. The fact of the matter is that there are not that many. In fact that 100,000 "booty shakers" that I estimated before is HUGE compared to the numbers of actual porn stars. While there are plenty of sexist language in pornographic "acting" and titles (as the young ladies read for us), a cursory glance across the board will let you know that the sexist language is not reserved for black women. Also a "study" of the vast internet porn marketplace will show that just about any and every racial group of women are "represented" (often at the "service" of a white male but that's another discussion). Again since the populations of black women involved in this industry is miniscule compared to the population of black women, why are black people being asked to explain themselves for the actions of a literal handful of people?

Lets look at Rap music. how many so called gangster rappers are there out there screamin' about bitches and ho's? 500? 1000? since the last time I listened to the radio I only heard the same 5-6 artists the over and over again I'm going to assume that I am being generous with that 500 number. so again out of the total population of black males in America (~18 million), how does .002% of the population (at most) suddenly represent black culture?

By the end of 2003 50-Cent' Debut album, Get Rich..., sold 6.5 million copies. If black people were the only ones purchasing the album then that would mean that 18% of the black population purchased the album. Much higher than the .05% doing the booty shaking, but still a particularly small population. But we know that black folk were not the only people purchasing "Get Rich". Knowing this, and knowing that Soundscan claims to not collect demographic data on the sales of music, I would venture that a smaller population of black folk, purchased the album (I'm one of the majority that did not). I would hazard to guess that even less black folk have purchased Snoop Dogg's individual albums. So again how is it that the entire population of black folk are being asked to explain the actions of the minority of the population especially a population that by and large does not control the means of production, distribution or broadcast o said population.

Ultimately, we should not even be trying to "explain" ourselves to other people. Rather we should turn the tables and ask them why they feel it is OK to judge black folk based on a small number of people. We should ask why, if they can "understand" that TV is not reality when it comes to whites and Asians, than why that "understanding" is suspended when it comes to black folk. But even more importantly let us not fall into the trap of being black woman body/sexuality police.

Technorati Tags: critique, politics

Double Standard Indeed!! *Warning! This Post Contains FOUL Language!!*

Again. THIS IS A WARNING. FOUL LANGUAGE AHEAD!!!


I want to send out a huge FUCK YOU to Detective or Sargent Fuentez or whatever THAT FUCK his name is.

Today we learned that the officer driving NJ Governor Corzine was doing above 90MPH at the time of the accident,

Detective Fuentez, in an interview aired on NJN News was quoted as saying that "we need to take into consideration the situation" in which the speed may have been "appropriate."

FUCK YOU.

From all the people in NJ who have had the indignity of being harassed by police speed traps, being followed and had our bank accounts tapped. How dare you even SAY something like that when if any civilian was caught doing less than that would be laughed out of court if they even attempted to say "I was late." " I was in a rush for an important meeting."

FUCK YOU.

NJ resident.

Speaking Of Double Standards

I was going to post on the whole double standard thing, but Dr. Edward Rhymes, who've I've had an online debate with before has an excellent post on the matter so I'll let him take the stage:

Eric Clapton's "Cocaine" and the Beatles "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" (LSD, as well as almost anything by Jefferson Airplane or Spaceship. Several songs from "Tommy" and Pink Floyd's "The Wall" are well known drug songs. "Catholic girls", "Centerfold", "Sugar Walls" by Van Halen were raunchy, misogynistic, lust-driven rock refrains. Even the country music legend Kenny Rogers in his legendary ballad, “Coward Of The County,” spoke of a violent gang-rape and then a triple-homicide by the song’s hero to avenge his assaulted lover. Marilyn Manson declared that one of the aims of his provocative persona was to see how much it would take to get the moralists as mad at white artists as they got about 2LiveCrew. He said it took fake boobs, Satanism, simulated sex on stage, death and angst along with semi-explicit lyrics, to get the same screaming the 2LiveCrew got for one song. Manson thought this reaction was hypocritical and hilarious.

I'm going to probably follow up with a post that addresses the following question posed in Rhymes' post:

Savage further asserts that the race-based double standard applies to violent content in music as well."There was the Eric Clapton remake of Marley's 'I Shot the Sheriff,' and there was little to be said. But then you have the 'Cop Killer' song by Ice-T and it's dangerous and threatening."

In this same article Cynthia Fuchs, an associate professor at George Mason University, affirmed that “the public seems far more disturbed by misogynistic lyrics in the music of rap and hip hop artists who are largely black than similar lyrics in rock music, perceived by most as a white genre.”

From The Notebooks Of Dr. Brain

From The Notebooks Of Dr. Brain is a Sci-Fi book from the mind of Minister Faust of the Bro-Log and I entered into reading it with high expectations.

When I started the book I was confused by the numerous acronyms that were thrown at me in the midst of a battle that was the opening of the book. I had to put the book down. This is not a fault of the author. It was me. I've found that since I deal with computers and computer language most of the time, I needed to adjust my mind for this book, much like I do for anything non-technical. This was a good move on my part.

Once I returned to the book, I soon became very impressed with the author's mixing of history, fiction, psycho-analysis and humor. Lots of humor. Once I got my mind wrapped around the acronyms I found that they were indeed coded references to some sort of historical account, social issue or something that would strike me later or the next day. My favorite by far is the Notorious N-I-G. Personally I think a college class could be taught on the numerous "oddly" named superheroes. I still haven't figured out yet whether Piltdown man was in fact a take on Piltdown man.

Personally I identified heavily with the X-Man. I don't want to post spoilers about the book, but suffice it to say that the X-Man Character along with the "Hawk-Kink" is a veritable encyclopedia of African history in coded form (like much else in the book). Ultimately this was a book worth purchasing and a good reader will also have a history book for reference. The acronyms can cause a bit of confusion for some but that's a minor quibble. I have to confess, I didn't answer the questions, but they were good ones that I do suggest people do answer for themselves.

Hip Hop to Pimp Hop, Hoes and History

"I'm a ho, you know I'm a ho. How do you know? Because I told you so."

So went the line in Whodini's infamous track "I'm a ho".


Thanks to Don Imus, the word "ho" has been placed front and center of the American conscience. We, that is those of us in the so called "hip hop generation, knew full well what a "ho" was. For those still unawares of what a "ho" is, it would be any person, of any race who was deemed particularly sexually "prolific". If the Whodini quote doesn't show that, then a quick review of pre-conscious KRS-ONE's tribute to the prowess of late DJ Scott La Rock:

Scott La Rock had 'em all.
He is a super ho!

Now, to be clear, back in the day, one had to be very specific about who one referred to as a ho. In fact in some circles one could have been ridiculed if one claimed to be a ho without "bonifides". You woudn't even THINK about calling Queen Latifa a ho. Nor would MC Lyte be referred to in such a manner. Black folks generally knew who a ho was and who was not. But that was when Hip Hop was still a "black thing". That was when you had to get mix tapes or wait till the Rap Attack on 'BLS or DJ' Red Alert's spin sessions on Kiss FM. Generally this was before white folks knew what Hip Hop was.

Back in that time, a time of party anthems, BDP, The Bridge, Radio and Dear Yvette, there was plenty of profanity and talk of black pride. I, self was introduced to Hip Hop via The Message blasting from the local record store on Sutphin Blvd while waiting on the Q6. That track was one of the few that made it on air. Back then, there were rules about what got air play. It had to be clean. period. You could cut a tape on anything you wanted but it wasn't getting airplay if you cussed. Period.

"My Adidas", "Bring the Noise", and Arrow Smith's colabo with Run DMC on "Walk This Way." brought White Suburbia into the mix. You had white kids in Bomber jackets and picking up Hip Hop music. The Beastie Boys, Third Base, and the like made Hip Hop more "accessible" to this soon to be huge market. Meanwhile something had to be done about those Africa Medallion wearing Black Pride MOFO's like Tribe Called Quest and DE LA Soul. Personally out of that era I think that PE and KRS one presented the largest threat to the social system than any other publicly known MC's. KRS one not only dropped science (however flawed) but HE was and IS a TOP RATED MC. Period. PE, fronted by Chuck D was the consciouness raising hype man next to KRS (in my opinion) since I think KRS One could out rhyme Chuck any day of the week (I'm just sayin'). After PE got you ready to fight the Power, you had KRS talkin' about "Bo! Bo! Bo!" and "You MUST Learn"!

It was about this time that the record companies, upon seeing what "safe" Hip Hop could sell after the likes of The Fresh Prince blew up with "Parents Just Don't Understand" realized that they had a "Nappy headed Negro" problem. If Hip Hop became dominated by KRS types rather than folks such as Heavy D and the Boys, then it would remain nitched. But if you made it "safe" then you could make some serious loot. So artists with less controversial language came to the fore such as LL Cool J. Now I'm not knockin' LL, I remember his very first album but we all know that after he rocked the bells, he really blew up on the Like a Panther and Momma Said albums.

Once this rise of what some called "happy rap" happened there was a nascent 'real rap music" movement in which MC's would lament the ability to get prime time airplay. Hence we saw the call for "real rap music" and to "keep it real" though this realness was never really defined. Wasn't The Show real? Wasn't LA-Di-Dadi real? In retrospect what we were really seeing was a call for the more explicit rhymes that one could get a peek of late nights on the weekends or in the clubs. But even those would be tame compared to what would soon be unleashed from the left coast.

Just as this "safe" Hip Hop was brining Hip Hop into the mainstream, we had this explosion from the West Coast. NWA. Then things got "interesting". While it could be argued that tracks like "Criminal Minded" were the first "gangster rap" tracks to make it on air, I don't think anyone can argue that once NWA stepped on the scene, that true gangsterism and gang style came to the fore. First off, the very name of the group put "Nigga" dead into the public sphere as never before. Sure "Nigga" had been said on air before by black folk (The Jeffersons). Sure it had been said on a track before, but no artist in their right mind, until then would even THINK about marketing themselves as a "Nigga". NWA spawned BWA, for those with long term memory problems, that was Bitchiz With Attitudes. The whole West Coast Hip Hop scene transformed Hip Hop in ways that would lead to very very destructive ends. What is most important though was the deep infiltration of gang and pimp culture into Hip Hop music. Ice T and Too Short, along with 2-Live Crew (among others) brought pimp and strip club culture into the main artery of Hip Hop. Men were no longer hoes. Men were "pimps" and "ho" became the exclusive domain of women. Just as it is on the street and clubs. Once this happened Hip Hop was changed because it became a money game. Hip Hop became "this Rap Game" And for those familiar with pimp and gang culture, when you "run game" you are hustling and you hustle for one thing: Cash. Hip Hop stopped being a form of black entertainment and became a Cash machine, another means for poor black men (mostly) to make money.

One had to understand that once Hip Hop took off within' black America, anyone with a microphone and a tape deck could make a tape and sell it on the corner or out the trunk of a car. In fact the vast majority of Hip Hop artists start out that way. In fact most artists start out that way. Hip Hop music for the a large portion of urban poor America, became an alternate and legal means of income. It was the rap game much like the drug game: Another way to make money without bending and scraping to "the man". Of course the audience for such music was at first was the 'hood the artist came from. This hood, filled with people who like any other group of people, wishes to see themselves reflected in their entertainment, connects with the lyrics that describe their hood or the mentality of that 'hood. So that the pimp and gang culture with it's requisite mysogyny and violence is reflected in that music is not some anomaly. it's not some conspiracy by the artist. It is simply a means to get paid. Period. It is not much different than the fact that Western music reflects so called country cowboy life and certain types of rock music is reflective of white teen suicide wishes.

What is important to understand here is that there is no means to legally stop anyone from producing any kind of music they want. There is also no legal means to stop anyone who wishes to, to purchase said music. Commentators that try to act like the government can or even should censor rap artisis because they don't like what kind of music they perform are taking the wrong tack and completely mis-understand where the real blame ought to be assigned for the stuff they "see".

The problem Hip Hop has, at least in the greater public is the record companies and the FCC. The reason that we have the relative garbage we have in Hip Hop is because of the "rap game". Record companies want one thing: profit. They will do whatever is legal to produce that profit. It is legal business to record and sell Hip Hop of any stripe. It is legal to record and sell Hip Hop with racist, sexist or any other language. The government cannot legally do anything about that. Anyone who wishes it would ought to be very careful about what they are asking for.

The real issue for both record companies and certain radio hosts is: Why is there a market for certain types of music or talk?
Simply put, millions of people listen to Don Imus, Millions of people purchase Hip Hop albums. Here's the rub though: the FCC sets pretty strict decency rules about what can and cannot be broadcast on the public airwaves. For some reason the FCC thinks that Janet Jackson's titty is more offensive than calling women hoes. For all the protests about rappers using crude language, the fact of the matter is that on the public airwaves it doesn't get broadcast. There are "clean" versions of any broadcast track to minimize the radio censor's work.
While any artist can be "fired" by his or her record company for any lyric the fact of the matter is that these artists are recruited because of their lyrics. This is the profound difference. I don't care to prevent Imus from saying whatever he want's to in private. If he was at home with his boys and commented that those were some "nappy headed hoes", that's his business. I dont' have to like it, but he has the right to say it, in private. Heck he has the right to say it on the street too. Similarly, I don't care for the language of many rap artists but I don't have the right to stop them from saying it in the privacy of their homes. In fact I don't even have the right to prevent them from writing raps with that language. Nor do I have the right to stop them from selling it.

The issue at hand is whether a company wants to be associated with such ideas. Clearly the record companies have made their position clear: They support the artists "right" to say it and their right to sell it. The radio stations that carry the music also support these rights within the FCC regulations. The advertisers of the various shows also support the radio stations. Why? Because this is the "rap game" Hip Hop at it's most capitalistic.

Understanding that the entire issue here comes down to money then we can only deal with the problem via economics. There are stupid black people out there who write to newspapers and such that they don't listen to rap music. They don't let their kids listen to rap music. These are, in my opinion, elitist, shamed of being black, folk. Seriously. Not only that, many of them are hypocrites because Jazz, R&B and other forms of black music had the same criticism in their day. Look at it this way. If I'm a music producer or artist and someone tells me that they don't purchase rap music and that person says they want me to change what I produce. I will tell them to take a hike ( to be kind). No way no how would any sane person with mouths to feed, NOT produce the music that does so, knowing that they will not buy.
Hence, the real and only way to change the Hip Hop music scene is to put your money in the pockets of the decent artist. Clearly if you don't listen to rap music then you don't know who these artists are. Simply put conscious Hip Hop rarely gets air or digital play. And that is NOT accidental.

In the end Hip Hop reflects America's obsession with sex, violence and money. if people are going to be upset with certain artists in Hip Hop music, reflecting that, then we ought to be asking why we have a system that pays niggas to be niggas. We ought to ask why MYV can go from a no Rap policy to Sucker Free Sundays. Clearly Viacom and it's employees don't have problems with sex, violence and money. Also, I'd be interested in knowing whether or not many of the people that object to the culture of violence and mysogyny in Hip Hop are also willing to address the social and economic issues that push so many young black men to see Pimp Hop as the best means of alleviating poverty.

Technorati Tags: critique, Hip Hop

A Special Case of Profiling in NJ

Firstly, I want to express my best wishes to Governor Corzine and his family. I hope he has a speedy and uncomplicated recovery.

Now I want to get at a problem I have with this situation. When I heard of the kinds of injuries that Corzine received in the accident I knew that he was not wearing his seat belt. Given that he was riding in a late model SUV with at least second generation air bags; the trauma to his chest and legs made it clear that he at least hit the dashboard. Also of interest to me was the fact that Corzine was being driven by a NJ State Trooper.

I am very bothered by this.

I have been stopped on the NJ Highways numerous times. I have been surrounded by police, some with guns drawn. I have been told that my birthday matches the birthday of someone who recently robbed a house in a neighborhood I was driving past on Rt 17. I along with many other black people have been harrassed by the NJ State Troopers who have used inane excuses to pull us over and search our vehicles. I have witnessed prosecutors and judges berate citizens and threaten to take away thier licenses for offenses that had nothing to do with safety and everything to do with lining the pockets of the county in question (Paramus I'm looking in your direction). I've been pulled over on the Turnpike, in pouring rain for allegedly having a tail light out (it was not).

I find it particularly insulting that Governor Corzine was permitted to be driven in a vehicle, by a NJ State Trooper no less, without his seatbelt. So I'm left to wonder just who else the NJ State Troopers allow to get away with law breaking while at the same time they feel free to prey on the wallets of citizens and whomever else happens to be driving in NJ?

This is just another example to me of the crass indifference to ordinary citizens that I have witnessed in New Jersey (Hackensack City Manager, and Captain of Police, I'm talking about you).

So perhaps this will provide the opportunity for the State and it's officers and officials to re-evaluate the "club" they think they belong to where they can routinely defacate on citizens while excepting themselves from the rules.

Speaking of Hip Hop

Brother Minister Faust has an ontime post on the demise of Hip Hop.

the super rich elites who control the production, distribution and radio/video play of pop music in North America, the same people who bought out the small labels when political hip hop was in its ascendancy, the same people who replaced conscious hip hop and its aesthetics with gangsta and then playa rap.

He links out to a post by Nekesa Mumbi Moody who shows among other things:

Though music sales are down overall, rap sales slid a whopping 21 percent from 2005 to 2006, and for the first time in 12 years, no rap album was among the top 10 sellers of the year.

I am not surprised. Last weekend I happened to leave my place sans-iPod which is a rare occurrence. I use the iPod simply because the radio does nothing for me. As if to provide more proof of radio's irrelevance to my ears, I happened to put on Hot 97 here in the Big A. That was a mistake. See I was headed to the gym and wanted something upbeat. well after the third "artists" came on that had the same beat, same style, and absolutely nothing of value to say, I turned around and headed back to my place to retrieve my iPod. I mean, I'm not a tight ass. I understand that there is a "need" for mindless party music, but they lyrics were so wack, so empty and so damn repetitive (bling, hoes, whips, chains, rims, Crys, Holla, and walkin' it out) that it was truly annoying. I couldn't even tune the words out as I had been able to because it was just THAT annoying.

Now I understand exactly why The Strange Fruit Project is the last Hip Hop I purchased.

The Duke Rape (not so) Case

As I said in my original write up on the case. The men involved walked. As I tried to tell a few online "feminists" the case was weak and became weaker by the month. Does it mean that something terrible didn't happen to the young woman? Not at all, It simply means that the evidence is to weak to prosecute. I wrote, about a year ago:

The next thing that went down was the DNA evidence or lack thereof. I was pretty much certain, as I'm sure the DA was, that when the DNA evidence came back the boys involved would be on the hook. Well the DNA evidence did no such thing. Instead we found out on or about April 11 that the DNA recovered did not match any of the Lacrosse players:

Appearing today on the alleged victim's campus, Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong acknowledged that DNA tests failed to link any of 46 white lacrosse team members to the victim. The team's one black member was not tested.

Interestingly, we note that the report wasn't that no DNA evidence was found but that the DNA evidence found did not match any of the white players...

For example, three defense sources, who asked not to be identified, said a forensic examination of the alleged victim found no tearing, bleeding or other injury associated with a sexual assault. Instead, the exam detected only swelling in the accuser's vagina and tenderness in her breasts and lower right body, the sources said.

Citing nearly 1,300 pages of documents given them last week by the prosecution, the defense sources also said Tuesday that the woman told police she had sex with three men around the time of the alleged rape, which she said occurred at a Duke lacrosse team party at which she had been hired as an exotic dancer. The men were identified as her boyfriend and two drivers for the escort service for which she worked.


This is what it really came down to. Says the prosecutor:

An independent investigation “showed clearly that there is insufficient evidence to proceed,” Roy A. Cooper, the state attorney general, said at a televised news conference. “ We believe these individuals are innocent.”

He said the accounts of the events given by the woman who made the accusations were so inconsistent that they were not credible. “She contradicts herself,” Mr. Cooper said.

Like I said: Reasonable doubt.

Knowing this, had the prosecution gone ahead and lost the case, which they surely would have, the prosecutor and the state would have been set up for what we call "malicious prosecution" (something I think the US Justice Department may end up learning about).

I do know one thing though. Don Imus isn't the only one with "nappy headed hoe" floating through his head..

Technorati Tags: Duke Rape Case

Nappy Headed Ho's and Stringy Haired Tricks

After thinkin' Mr. Imus's and Brian McGuirk's commentary on atheletic black women, refering to them as Nappy Headed hoes' and the game as Jiggaboos vs. Wannabees,

I think one of, if not all, black sports commentators ought to, from now till Imus is out, refer to white female athletes as "stringy hair tricks".

Since apparently using such descriptors does not warrant a fine, suspension, or any other than a half-assed apology, those black commentators should feel free to call white female athletes, "stringy hair tricks".

And for the info of NBC, that Jigaboo comment is right up there with "nigger." so in effect Mr. McGuirk took to racial name calling on air and apparently without consequence.

That's cool though, 'cause now we know. It's perfectly OK to refer to white female atheletes as:

Pasty, Stringy hair tricks.

Thanks, NBC for clearing that up.




He hee hee. Apparently we'll need to keep the pasty, stringy hair tricks as NBC and CBS are apparently at least willing to suspend Imus for 2 weeks. I would want to know what will be happenening to Brian "Jigaboo" McGuirk.

Edwards Get's It Right on FOX Debates

The Black Agenda Report has been consistently putting the CBC on blast for failing to live up to the expectations of the general black population. One the latest absurd actions of the CBC has been to contract with FOX (FAKE) NEWS to promote debates of the presidential candidates. That the CBC, through it's institute, would align itself with a program with the likes of Bill O'Reilly and folk like Ann Coulter, is beyond rational belief, though it appears that Earl Ofari Hutchinson can understand:

The deal is less a violation of principle and integrity that critics lambaste it as then just another business deal. The CBC's oft-stated mantra is that in politics there are no permanent friends or enemies, just permanent interests. In inking the deal with Fox, the caucus is merely living up to its mantra. And since that's the way the CBC does business, its interest in Fox and Fox's interest in it makes perfectly good sense.

Well I guess, it's so much for a "different kind of politics" and underscores exactly why folk like Cynthia McKinney have to go. So the question really is, in light on Hutchinson's comment, what are the permanent interests of the CBC Institute, and how does lining with a patently offensive network serve that interest?
Well that question is pretty clear to Edwards, who has dropped from the debate.

”We believe there’s just no reason for Democrats to give Fox a platform to advance the right-wing agenda while pretending they’re objective,” said Jonathan Prince, Edwards’ deputy campaign manager.

Exactly.

Now does this mean that the debate in and of itself cannot be "objective"? No of course not, but the fact is that by holding the debate on the FOX channel, in it's current form, would be signaling tacit approval of it's format. I would hope that the other candidates refuse to participate as well though I'm sure the thought of losing Rupert Murdock money, which is the real "permanent interest" here may be giving them pause.

Now we understand that the CBCI is a non-profit and therefore "a-political" organization, but If I were in the CBC I would be very
concerned with the very public link that this deal has with an organization I would be linked with. In terms of fund raising, is the CBCI of the opinion that they could not raise funds by linking up with any other organization? Perhaps money would have been left on the table, but at least they would have their reputation intact. Right now it's as if the CBC was caught on the street with a ho. You can't be SURE that something is about to go down or went down, but it sure don't look right. Though in this case, the CBCI may be the ho.

At the end of the day for me, Edwards did the right thing.




Update: Apparenly Clinton and Obama read Garvey's Ghost. Okay. Probably not but it both Clinton and Obama have declined to dignify FOX with their presence. This will not provide the CBCI with any political cover for calling off the debate. They will have to answer to the CBC constituents for that dumb move and I cannot wait to read what excuse they will come up with.. well aside from that "broad audience" thing.

Technorati Tags: Congressional Black Caucus, politics

Interesting Read

The NY Times Magazine has an article on the Pope and his take on the de-Christianization of Europe (Keeping the Faith. It is an interesting read not so much for the focus on Christianity and Europe but for the more base message of the roll of religion and culture.

One of my critiques of Africans who adopt Islam is my perception that there is an arabization of that person. That is, I see Islam as a vehicle for Arab nationalism both political and cultural. I don't begrudge the Arab for this as every culture's religion is tightly wound into the culture and habits of the people that make it up. The Pope makes a statement, quoted by the Times that says:

“The Muslims ... feel threatened not by the foundations
of our Christian morality but by the cynicism of a secularized
culture that denies its own foundations.”

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, “Christianity and the Crisis of Cultures,” 2005



Ratzinger can be forgiven for focusing so hard on Muslims, or his misunderstanding of secularism, but for those of us who are Pan-Africanists this statement is very important. Many Black people have left (forcibly or voluntarily) their foundations (their own religious thought) for either Islam or Christianity (some Buddhists as well). This is very important because just as Ratzinger sees a problem with a culture that denies it's own foundation, but we Pan-Africanists see it too.

Today I was at a birthday party where a book was given to the birthday girl on women in the Bible. I was struck at how one elderly black woman could list, off the top of her head various women in the Bible. I was instructive to me to see how a large number of Africans in America can identify with ancient Hebrews and commit to memory their history. Yet most of these individuals cannot recollect a single piece of folklore from any ethnic group in Africa (excepting Sheeba).

Indeed in parts of Africa, Nigeria for instance, communities will essentially go to war with each other over religions that are not of their making. It is a particularly sad state of affairs. Here in the states, not toeing the Judeo-Christian line will essentially get one ignored (on a good day).

Another quote:

Ratzinger’s theme was “the spiritual roots of Europe,” and he criticized a culture that gave value and protection to other religions — notably Judaism and Islam — but that denied the same to Christianity. With his trademark bite, he identified “a peculiar Western self-hatred that is nothing short of pathological.”


“I began to realize that if we cannot recognize the fact that Christianity shaped our culture, then we lose our identity,” Pera said. “And then how can we have a dialogue with other civilizations? That’s exactly what has happened with Islam. Europe is losing its soul. Not only are we no longer Christian; we’re anti-Christian. So we don’t know who we are.”

Let me restate that for the African using Ifa as an example, but could easily be any other indigenous religion:

“I began to realize that if we cannot recognize the fact that Ifa shaped our culture, then we lose our identity,” Pera said. “And then how can we have a dialogue with other civilizations? That’s exactly what has happened with Islam and Christianity. Africa is losing its soul. Not only are we no longer OmoOrisa; we’re anti-Orisa. So we don’t know who we are.”


If Europeans are pathologically self-hating simply because of a perceived denial of Christianity, then what of the African? There is only one African country in which the national religion is an indigenous one: Benin. So according to Ratzinger, the Bininis are the only sane African people on the continent. So if African people are reading Ratzinger's words, then what should they be thinking? If he believes that a people ought not to deny their religious heritage in order to not be in danger of disappearing, then what does that mean for the million of non-European Christians?

Technorati Tags: Africa, critique, Pan-Africanism, Religion

"Really, it's a myth"

Not to beat a dead horse, but upon stumbling on this piece in the NY Times, I thought it would go as a nice pre "Good Friday" and "Easter Sunday" posting.

“Really, it’s a myth,” Dr. Hawass said of the story of the Exodus, as he stood at the foot of a wall built during what is called the New Kingdom.

Egypt is one of the world’s primary warehouses of ancient history. People here joke that wherever you stick a shovel in the ground you find antiquities. When workers built a sewage system in the downtown Cairo neighborhood of Dokki, they accidentally scattered shards of Roman pottery. In the middle-class neighborhood of Heliopolis, tombs have been discovered beneath homes.

But Egypt is also a spiritual center, where for centuries men have searched for the meaning of life. Sometimes the two converge, and sometimes the archaeological record confirms the history of the faithful. Often it does not, however, as Dr. Hawass said with detached certainty.

“If they get upset, I don’t care,” Dr. Hawass said. “This is my career as an archaeologist. I should tell them the truth. If the people are upset, that is not my problem.”

The story of the Exodus is celebrated as the pivotal moment in the creation of the Jewish people. As the Bible tells it, Moses was born the son of a Jewish slave, who cast him into the Nile in a basket so the baby could escape being killed by the pharaoh. He was saved by the pharaoh’s daughter, raised in the royal court, discovered his Jewish roots and, with divine help, led the Jewish people to freedom. Moses is said to have ascended Mt. Sinai, where God appeared in a burning bush and Moses received the Ten Commandments.

In Egypt today, visitors to Mount Sinai are sometimes shown a bush by tour guides and told it is the actual bush that burned before Moses.[ Okay. I got a great laugh out of that one. Folks what exactly is the lifespan of a bush? Really. That would have to be the OLDEST bush in existence. I can buy a 3,000 year old tree, but a 3000 year old bush? That is too much.]


But archaeologists who have worked here have never turned up evidence to support the account in the Bible, and there is only one archaeological find that even suggests the Jews were ever in Egypt. Books have been written on the topic, but the discussion has, for the most part, remained low-key as the empirically minded have tried not to incite the spiritually minded.

So let's be clear here. It is KNOWN that there is no evidence of any purported Exodus. There are multiple books discussing this topic and yet and still this myth is put in our faces because no one wants to upset or incite the "spiritually minded"? I mean seriously, Incite them to do what exactly?

Of course there is always the coverup theory:

“A pharaoh drowned and a whole army was killed,” he said recounting the portion of the story that holds that God parted the Red Sea to allow the Israelites to escape, then closed the waters on the pursuing army.

“This is a crisis for Egypt, and Egyptians do not document their crises

I mean a river is parted. Egypt, the most powerful nation at the time, loses hundreds if not thousands of soldiers and generals and the only surviving account is from the group with the most to gain from the story. Right. I mean it's not like this group had any ulterior motives for telling such a story. Besides, there are no other documented "bad" periods in ancient Khemet. Nope. none at all.


Also: Abrahamic What?
Book of Coming Forth By Day

Technorati Tags: Africa, critique, Culture, Religion

Mash It Up Inna Zim-Bab-We

As I read reports last night about the absolute foolishness going on in Zimbabwe I had the sounds of Bob Marley's seminal song Zimbabwe floating through my head. The Survival album is one that I believe Mr. Mugabe and his supporters ought to take a listen to. How ad it seems that songs such as 'Ambush in the Night" could be applied to a man and party responsible for the liberation of Zimbabwe from the British.

I have previously written open letters to Mr. Mugabe because I find the situation in Zimbabwe unacceptable as a Pan-Africanist. I had and have no problem with the concept of land liberation. But I have been in complete dismay at the manner it which it was carried out. I was completely P.Oed over the wrecking of shanty towns by the authorities. I could continue to list the numerous problems I have with the party in power but the biggest problem right now is Mr. Mugabe.

Mr. Mugabe is 83 years old. He should have passed the banner to new leadership a long long long time ago. This long term "leadership" is at the center of the problem with Zimbabwe. It is not a government but rather a fiefdom of Mr. Mugabe and his supporters. Mugabe wants to stay in power simply because he knows full well there is nothing else for him to do when he leaves. Why is that? because HE has overseen the financial ruin of his country. Some may say that the problem is because the British have been meddling with Zimbabwe over the expulsion of the white farmers. Rubbish!

Mugabe, as a leader of the liberation movement in Africa and a contemporary of Nkrumah, Sekou Toure and other Pan-Africanists, knew full well that the British would be attempting to interfere with his new state. It was his job as leader to be sure to prepare his country and people to have life lines that did not depend upon the British. When they finally got around to land reclamation why hadn't they prepared people, by sending them to other African countries or other countries with Agriculture expertise, so that they could step in without disrupting the food supply? That's poor leadership.

Furthermore; any and everyone knows they will eventually die. Where was the plan for the new leadership? That Mugabe has been in power as long as he has been is a huge problem. The recent abductions and beatings of members of the opposition party is a sad commentary on the state of affairs in Zimbabwe. Even IF the perpetrators were not members of the ruling party, the fact that there is a climate in Zimbabwe in which people think that abductions and beatings are the proper means of expressing ones political disagreements is a sad reflection on the leadership in Zimbabwe. The problem with this culture of political violence is that it doesn't stop easily. Once other groups realize that they can use violence to foist themselves into power, it becomes a free for all. We have seen how bad this stuff can get in Sierra Leonne, Liberia and The DRC to name a few.

Technorati Tags: Africa, critique, governance, Leadership, Pan-Africanism

Creationists Get Silly With It

So browsing a forum the other day I stumbled across the following on Richard Dawkins site. For those unfamiliar with Richard Dawkins, he is the Author for the God Delusion. The top video on Peanut Butter should give a good laugh to anyone familiar with and who understands the theory of Evolution. Then after thinking about it you should be very concerned that there are millions of people who actually believe this guy and will not only argue with you based on the silliness presented there, but want to have this kind of nonsense to be a part of school curriculums.





Oh and the Banana argument...






and rebut:




My suggestion to anyone who actually believes in biblical creationism to not ever repeat what you saw here in an argument. Well except the last link. Really. Just don't do it.

Technorati Tags: creationism, critique, Culture

The Cost of Immigrant Labour

I haven't written on the immigration debate in a while, but it has been on my mind. I just ran across this piece in the LA times entitled The Southland's hidden Third World slums

Which truly underscores the problem of illegal immigration and exploitation of workers in general.

Out here — just a few miles from world-class golf resorts, private hunting clubs and polo fields — half-naked children toddle barefoot through mud and filth while packs of feral dogs prowl piles of garbage nearby.

Thick smoke from mountains of burning trash drifts through broken windows. People — sometimes 30 or more — are crammed into trailers with no heat, no air-conditioning, undrinkable water, flickering power and plumbing that breaks down for weeks or months at a time.

"I was speechless," said Haider Quintero, a Colombian training for the priesthood who recently visited the parks as part of his studies. "I never expected to see this in America."

"Before the parks, they were living in their cars, in the desert and bathing in the canals. Five guys would pay 50 bucks a month to share a camper shell," said Scott Lawson, a tribal member and co-owner of the Oasis park on the reservation. "Nobody cared when they lived like that, only when they moved into trailers. You can't expect the poorest to live like the wealthiest. They feel comfortable here; it's like being back in Mexico. They tell me that."

Lawson's 300-trailer park has been cited by the EPA for clean-water violations and was recently ordered to stop pumping raw sewage into the nearby Salton Sea.

"We had some citations about water but it's because we didn't know how to test it," he said. "I'm not ashamed of my place. There are a lot worse places than mine."

The tenants are almost entirely Latino farm or construction workers. Many are in the United States legally, but plenty are not. Their average income, according to county officials, is about $10,000 a year. Many parents rent out their children's rooms for extra money, leaving kids to sleep on floors or in sheds. Many families keep warm by burning grape stakes, which fill their trailers with toxic fumes.


The italicized portion is what should concern people. Understand that the companies are paying what I can barely say are "poverty" wages. and when these companies, who are largely breaking various laws, are allowed to get away with this blatant exploitation, it then creates an environment where the rest of us (citizens) are next in line. It is already being done and many of us have been discussing this before the immigration issue came to the forefront of the nation's conscience. So long as employers can hang the "there's someone out there who will accept x-wages" over the head of citizens for various work, then conditions like this will continue. Do we really think that the construction companies that hire these individuals give a damn how or where they are living? If you, the citizen were on the "pick up corner" with these folk, do you think they would give a damn how YOU were living? Toxic dump? Cold at night? Not the construction firm's problem or their client's problem either.

200 year marker of the begining of the end of the trans-atlantic slave trade

Remember the Ifa proverb -If we stand tall, it is because we stand
on the backs of those who came before us …. Odu Ifa Orangun Meji –

On March 25th we will pour libation for and make Bibo (appeasement
offerings) for those African's that survived the Transatlantic Maafa,
as a humble way to say thank you for what they did and for what they
gave. This date is important because March 25, 2007 is exactly the
200 year marker of the beginning of the end of the tragic Middle
Passage. That day is important for us to acknowledge breaking the
cycle.

Those that see this point or feel the need are welcome. For those
that choose to acknowledge the sacrifice of their ancestors and
commemorate this 200th year on March 25th, 2007 practitioners of
traditional African spirituality: Ifa, Orisha, etc. should give ebo
to the Earth, to our ancestors individually and/or with others to mark
the 200th year since the British Government signed the
1807declaration, making it illegal to transport Africans to the New
World and to abolish the Trans-Atlantic slave
trade.

And those that do not feel it important, it is not an issue, we are
all moved in different ways to do different things in life.

Last year the United Nations (UN) declared 2007 as the year to mark
The 200th year - International Day for the Commemoration of the 200th
Anniversary of the Abolition of the Trans-Atlantic SlaveTrade signed
on March 25th 1807 by the British Parliament. It is
also important to note that the USA , signed the bill on March 3rd
1807 to take effect beginning Jan 1st , 1808.

For those that want to recognise the collective sacrifices of our
ancestors: spread the word to commemorate this important bicentennial
in preparation for Jan 1st 2008 which will mark 200 years that the US
signed to cease exporting Africans as enslaved people.

Remember that March 25th, 2007 , can make an impact in our own back
yard. The 25th of March will mark the recognition of how our
realities were shaped within the USA: by stopping the massive exodus
of more Africans, and prevented them from going through the dreaded
Middle Passage, to arrive in the USA to work as slave labor, and
adding more
to our people here still enslaved. This is a very important marker
and one we cannot forgo.

What have you done within your lifetime to commemorate the efforts of
those that came before you on a large scale like the Ifa Council-
Maafa Project is proposing?

The British Federal Government plans to fund national events with 20
million British pounds (approx $40 million US dollars) for events and
activities with the main event at the national memorial service
outside of London, UK . The Jamaican Government is already into its
year of commemoration that began Jan 2nd 2007 and will run until Jan
25, 2008 and their theme: "Our Freedom Journey….Honoring our
Ancestors."

The Ifa Council's – Maafa Project, is generating a theme and ideas to
commemorate this important bicentennial, with several major
activities geared towards honoring the sacrifice of our ancestors.

The 3 key activities wish to acknowledge our progenitors & their
struggles are:
1) Ceremony to those that did not make it through the middle passage
(the 8+ weeks on the slave ships when disease, infections, rapes and
mass murder were rampant, which had no formal burial rites or
anything as yet.
2) A Memorial Event should be used to acknowledge those that did make
it to New World, yet either died holding onto and refusing to give up
our ancestral ways, or for playing African drums and not hiding the
practice of the traditional rites and were massacred for openly
practicing our traditions.
3) Then honor those that managed to survive and hold on to the Yoruba
& other traditions that were carried to the New World (Americas), by
camouflaging the practices with things more acceptable to the slave
master / colonizer, and by calling them something else, all as a
means to allow what they believed inside to survive, until another
day today. ++++++++++++++++

For more info and to be included email: maafa@ifacouncil.com

3 Officers Indicted!!!

disregaring what I considered to be an attempt at Grand Jury poisoning, the Grand Jury has indicted Isnor, Cooper and Oliver.
I said that I thought that the officer who fired off two clips was supposed to be indicted as well as the officer that started the shooting. The other fellow I'm not sure about but in each case these are the officers that fired the most shots.

Personally, I'm not at all concerned that the other two officers (Carey and Headley) were not indicted because from what I know, those two only fired a single shot and therefore it would be reasonably argued that they fired because they heard a shot but they followed police proceedure by not shooting numerous times. Since I, if I was on the jury, would likely be convinced of reasonable doubt on those two. This post will be updated as more information is made available.




Update: According to the NY Times:

The jury charged two of the detectives — Gescard F. Isnora, an undercover officer who fired the first shot, and Michael Oliver, who fired 31 shots — with manslaughter, two people with direct knowledge of the case said. The third detective, Marc Cooper, who fired four shots, faces a lesser charge of reckless endangerment, those two people said...

The person with direct knowledge of the case who said Detectives Isnora and Oliver faced manslaughter charges did not know if they were first- or second-degree counts. Second-degree manslaughter is defined as recklessly causing the death of another person. The three officers may also face additional lesser charges.\

According to Letlaw manslaughter is defined:

The unlawful killing of a human being without malice or premeditation, either express or implied; distinguished from murder, which requires malicious intent.

The distinctions between manslaughter and murder, consists in the following: In the former, though the act which occasions the death be unlawful, or likely to be attended with bodily mischief, yet the malice, either express or implied, which is the very essence of murder, is presumed to be wanting in manslaughter.

It also differs from murder in this, that there can be no accessaries before the fact, there having been no time for premeditation. Manslaugbter is voluntary, when it happens upon a sudden heat; or involuntary, when it takes place in the commission of some unlawful act.

The cases of manslaughter may be classed as follows those which take place in consequence of: 1. Provocation. 2. Mutual combat. 3. Resistance to public officers, etc. 4. Killing in the prosecution of an unlawful or wanton act. 5. Killing in the prosecution of a lawful act, improperly performed, or performed without lawful authority.

The provocation which reduces the killing from murder to manslaughter is an answer to the presumption of malice which the law raises in every case of homicide; it is therefore no answer when express malice is proved and to be available the provocation must have been reasonable and recent, for no words or slight provocation will be sufficient, and if the party has had time to cool, malice will be inferred.

In cases of mutual combat, it is generally manslaughter only when one of the parties is killed. When death ensues from duelling the rule is different, and such killing is murder.

The killing of an officer by resistance to him while acting under lawful authority is murder; but if the officer be acting under a void or illegal authority, or out of his jurisdiction, the killing is manslaughter, or excusable homicide, according to the circumstances of the case.

Killing a person while doing an act of mere wantonness, is manslaughter as, if a person throws down stones in a coal-pit, by which a man is killed, although the offender was only a trespasser.

When death ensues from the performance of a lawful act, it may, in consequence of the negligence of the offender, amount to manslaughter. For instance, if the death has been occasioned by negligent driving. Again, when death ensues, from the gross negligence of a medical or surgical practitioner, it is manslaughter.


Here at the Ghost, we think that definition 5 would be the basis for a manslaughter indictment. I also think this may be the best charge (even though we have called it murder before) because to go to trial and attempt to prove intent, necessary for a murder charge, would leave a wide door open called reasonable doubt as it is reasonable to come to the conclusion that the officers did not intend to kill Sean Bell.

To me the biggest hurdle faced now is to prove that either of the three killed Sean Bell. I'm not sure if that is legally necessary, but assuming it is, then that may be a problem for the prosecution and the officers may well walk or be found guilty of reckless endangerment charge which I think is unavoidable given the number of shots and the fact that bullets entered a home and the train station and the one officer emptied two clips in clear violation of his training.



Update (3-19-2007):

OK. So I stand corrected, well actually I stand clarified. The evidence shows who shot Sean Bell and co. so the charges are in fact related to the specific bullets that struck the victims as well as those that went into one of the houses as well as the AirTran station. The NY Times has a link to the indictment document which I want to highlight some important problems.

The first count is for 1st degree manslaughter. The problem with that is I think it will be very very very hard to prove intent on the part of police officers. I said earlier that any charge with intent would not work. I don't know what evidence the grand jury heard, that made them think 1st degree manslaughter was appropriate, but from what little I know, that charge is NOT going to stick.

The second count of second degree manslaughter is, in my opinion, provable because it only states that the officers acted "recklessly" using a "loaded pistol". To me, that is basically a statement of fact. Again, I don't know what evidence is going to be entered into evidence but even though the officers will claim they feared for their lives, police regulations are quite clear about shooting at moving vehicles. Secondly, because an alternate (and I believe regulation) procedure would have been to call in uniformed backup as to not blow the cover of the undercover officer(s).

on the third and fourth charges of 1st degree assault, I have to restate my doubt that intent will be proven beyond reasonable doubt.

The fifth count of second degree assault is provable beyond doubt. Again to me the charge is a statement of fact, unless some seriously exculpatory evidence comes to light.

On the 6th, 7th and 8th counts of reckless endangerment, I simply don't see how they will get off on those. Discharging 50 shots in such a manner that houses are shot into, and the public is put into danger is simply shoddy police work and shows a blatant disregard for the lives of civilians.

So to close, my position is that anything requiring intent will result in an acquittal and anything else is provable but depends on the jury (or judge).

Technorati Tags: Jamaica Queens Shooting, Sean Bell

Witness or Liar?

So the news is, that a new witness has come forward claiming to have seen the infamous "4th man" supposedly involved in the Sean Bell murder. I think he's a liar.

According Mr. Palladino and a lawyer involved in the case, a man walked into the 115th Precinct station house in Queens and said he had seen something important. The man, a worker in the area, described seeing a black man at the shooting scene on Liverpool Street fire a handgun and then run into a building, Mr. Palladino said.

Mr. Palladino said the witness had seen the gunman fire “once, maybe twice” at the police officers.

The problem with this "story" is this:

"He said he heard the clash of the car. He looks up and sees a male black fire one shot, maybe two, and run from the scene, possibly running into a building...

Cops had talked to the man just after the shooting, but he had lied and said he hadn't seen anything, a source said. He told cops yesterday that his Christian conscience nagged him to come forward and tell the truth, sources said...

There also was no evidence that Guzman, 31, Trent Benefield, 23, or Bell, 23, had a gun.

Additionally, all ballistics found at the scene have been traced to police weapons, a source said.

Police were heavily criticized for arresting numerous "suspects" who may have been outside Club Kalua and had information about a fourth man leaving the car.

So this man of Christian Conscience(tm) lied to the police about this 4th man and is not facing obstruction charges? And even if this went to court does ANY prosecutor out there on Queens Blvd. think that this witness will be taken seriously by a jury? Aside from this witness being an admitted liar, his story is completely contradicted by the available evidence. If this 4th man let off two shots then where are those bullets? Are we to believe that the NYPD, in addition to being reckless are also incapable of canvassing an area for bullets? Perhaps they are since they failed to create a dragnet to catch this so called 4th man.

The alternative would be that this 4th man was firing a police weapon. Now that would raise some other questions wouldn't it?

My position as of now, is that this person was produced to taint the grand jury by raising doubt since by my estimates at least two of the officers are in jeopardy, the one who fired the first shot and the officer that shot two clips worth. I hope the grand jury is not fooled and does not think that their job is to determine guilt. They are only to determine whether the charges should go to trial and there is enough evidence to do so.

Technorati Tags: Jamaica Queens Shooting

Back Of The Camel

Over the weekend I saw this article entitled: Between Black and Immigrant Muslims, an Uneasy Alliance Which had some very out there inaccuracies which appear to have been the fault of those interviewed rather than that of the NY Times. I'm using the phrase "Back of the Camel", which is normally a phrase I wouldn't use in reference to African-American Muslims, because I generally think it to be insensitive, but it is exactly what came to mind when I read the full article.

In brief, the Harlem Imam, Al-Hajj Talib ‘Abdur-Rashid, has been out ingratiating himself to Muslims of other nationalities in order to grow his Mosque, among other things. In the process of trying to get funds for his Mosque, and in the background of this article a number of rank inaccurate statements went completely unchallenged by the NY Times which I feel really needs to be set straight.

Let me start with this near opening statement:

For many African-American converts, Islam is an experience both spiritual and political, an expression of empowerment in a country they feel is dominated by a white elite. For many immigrant Muslims, Islam is an inherited identity, and America a place of assimilation and prosperity.

This italicized portion is one of my issues with many African-Americans who convert to Islam, the perception that it is a black thing to do and is THE credible act of resistance to White Supremacy. Much of this is due to the work of the Nation Of Islam and more importantly Malcolm X. There are many African-Americans who are Muslims today on the strength of Malcolm X's Auto-Biography, including Al-Hajj Talib ‘Abdur-Rashid. He says of his converstion:

Raised a Christian, he spent the first part of his youth in segregated North Carolina. As a teenager, he read “The Autobiography of Malcolm X” twice. He began educating himself about the faith at age 19, when as an aspiring actor he was cast in a play about a man who had left the Nation of Islam.

But his conversion was more spiritual than political, he said.

“I’d like to think that even if I was a white man, I’d still be a Muslim because that’s the orientation of my soul,” the imam said.

He has learned some Arabic, and traveled once to the Middle East, for hajj. Yet he feels more comfortable with the Senegalese and Guinean Muslims who have settled in Harlem than with many Arabs and South Asians.



This background is familiar ground for many African-American converts. You'll have to recall that because segregation in the US was done by Christians, to have Islam appear to be in opposition to such a practice is a powerful incentive to joining the faith. You'll note that Brother Talib claims that his change of faith was driven by a quest for spirituality. I reject this claim, given that black folks, specifically those in the Bible Belt are VERY spiritual and it would be particularly insulting to them to claim that they are less spiritual than any given Muslim. No, it is clear that the blackness of Malcolm X and his fortitude in the face of White Supremacy is what actually affected brother Talib. In terms of spirituality he could have easily studied Quakers, Buddhism, etc. but he did not. Nor did brother Talib study any of the traditional religions of Africa. Why not? Maybe it wasn't mentioned, but I don't believe that he did. Here's the reason for my statement:

“And we can’t let other people, from other cultures, come and try to make us clones of them. We came here as Muslims.”

We what? Excuse me? Exactly how did this individual come to such a conclusion? What historical facts back that up? None whatsoever.

Anyone who is familiar with the Atlantic Slave Trade would know that Ibos, Mandinkas, Yorubas Housas, Igbos, Kubans, Ngolans, Twi, Assante, Fante's of all manner of faiths were sold to white men and shipped to the Americas. How then can anyone Muslim or not, even make such an untenable claim? Well actually I've covered this phenomenon of "yellow-washing" African history by certain Muslim scholars, who much like their Christian counterparts feel the need to clean up the Arab and Muslim history in Africa. You can find detailed discussions of this phenomenon here:

http://garveys-ghost.blogspot.com/2006/02/afrocentricity-and-islam.html
and
http://garveys-ghost.blogspot.com/2006/02/afrocentricity-and-islam-ii.html

Now I'm not one to tell people what religions they should follow, but I think it isn't unfair to expect that people would at least be accurate in their statements about African people. As a Pan-Africanist, I would wonder why brother Talib would not be more concerned with his other African Muslims and "do for self" as taught by Malcolm X. I would also ask why he isn't on record as trying to form bonds with African and African-Americans of other non-Christian faiths. But then this is why the post is entitled the way it is.

Many of the mosque’s members embraced Islam in search of black empowerment, not black separatism. They describe racial equality as a central tenet of their faith. Yet for some, the promise of Islam has been at odds with the reality of Muslims.

One member, Aqilah Mu’Min, lives in the Parkchester section of the Bronx, a heavily Bangladeshi neighborhood. Whenever she passes women in head scarves, she offers the requisite Muslim greeting. Rarely is it returned. “We have a theory that says Islam is perfect, human beings are not,” said Ms. Mu’Min, a city fraud investigator.

If non-Black Muslims are acting as foul as white Christians then you've essentially put oneself into the same position as before. And besides, the historical question still stands, how is converting (reverting as some say) to Islam synonymous with "black empowerment"? Let's look at it like this 'Aqilah' and Mohammed are not African names. They are definite not West African in origin, where most African-American ancestors came from. Thus why is taking an Arabic name "black empowerment"? It is Islamic empowerment, but definitely not "black empowerment." I believe that such disrespect that many African-American Muslims experience will be solved in one of two ways:

1) They will subsume their own history and practices in order to be accepted by those with "unshattered Islamic heritage" or
2) They will wise up and do for self within' the faith. They will do as other African Muslims have done before them and adopt the faith to their own realities and do so in an unapologetic manner.

If individuals such as brother Talib want the respect of those of us who are outside the "big three", then they will have to cease with the pseudo history. In fact let me say this to all of us, since I've witnessed pseudo-history propagated on all sides. All of us really need to stop with the pseudo-history both between and within our respective groups.

Technorati Tags: Africa, Islam, Pan-Africanism, Religion

Wickedly Great

So watching Mr. Bashir on ABC's Nightline question Minister Farrakhan made me think that Bashir was doing a stand in roll for The ADL or AIPAC with his vain attempts at getting Farrakhan to apologise for various statements he has made during his life in the Nation Of Islam. Bashir, who was woefully unprepared for an orator of Farrakhan's expertise, failed to, if he indeed meant to, challenge the veracity of particular statements made by Farrakhan. That's not to say that everything that comes out of Farrakhan's mouth is fact, but the challenge was made to show what was in fact untruthful, which anyone familiar with Farrakhan would have expected, and Bashir had nothing to come back with. Well that's not entirely true. There was the whole Hitler as "wickedly great", a quote that many in the Jewish community as well as the media (sometimes one and the same), has taken and ran with as proof that Farrakhan and the NOI are out to put Jews back into gas chambers, neglecting that fact that black people have never attempted any such thing to any Jewish population, ever. But this projection of white crimes onto black organizations is not new and thus not unexpected. I do think though that for the record, the phrase "wickedly great" ought to be defined and understood, out on the net, should some curious soul do a Google search. Not that the people who use the phrase "wickedly great" as a club on Farrakhan don't understand what he said.

If one goes to dictionary.com you will find the definition of great as:

1. unusually or comparatively large in size or dimensions: A great fire destroyed nearly half the city.
2. large in number; numerous: Great hordes of tourists descend on Europe each summer.
3. unusual or considerable in degree, power, intensity, etc.: great pain.
4. wonderful; first-rate; very good: We had a great time. That's great!
5. being such in an extreme or notable degree: great friends; a great talker.
6. notable; remarkable; exceptionally outstanding: a great occasion.
7. important; highly significant or consequential: the great issues in American history.
8. distinguished; famous: a great inventor.
9. of noble or lofty character: great thoughts.
10. chief or principal: the great hall; his greatest novel.
11. of high rank, official position, or social standing: a great noble.
12. much in use or favor: “Humor” was a great word with the old physiologists.
13. of extraordinary powers; having unusual merit; very admirable: a great statesman.
14. of considerable duration or length: We waited a great while for the train.

definitions 3,6,7 and 11 are of relevance to our discussion. Anyone who is familiar with Hitler would have to conseed that Hitler was:

Unusual or considerable in degree.
notable, remarkable and exceptionally outstanding.
important, highly significant or consequential.
and of high rank, official position or social standing (in the Nazi Party at least).

Thus to desribe Hitler as a "great" man does not mean that one agrees with his ideology. Rather as commentary on hist historical role, he is a great individual. There is no questioning this. But Mr. Bashir, all brit-accented and all, apparently doesn't have the same range of vocabulary as Farrakhan and I and therefore said, on record, that he did not think Hitler was a great man(We'll interject here to point out that one weekend, the HIstory channel spent it's entire daytime broadcast time on WWII. So anybody who says with a straight face that Hitler was not great was either born yesterday, has amnesia or os a bald faced liar.). Of course Mr. Bashir confuses great in it's common vernacular usage as a compliment, with it's other equally valid, and in the case of the specific statement, more relevant meanings.

moving along we find that "wicked" means:

1.evil or morally bad in principle or practice; sinful; iniquitous: wicked people; wicked habits.
2. mischievous or playfully malicious: These wicked kittens upset everything.
3. distressingly severe, as a storm, wound, or cold: a wicked winter.
4. unjustifiable; dreadful; beastly: wicked prices; a wicked exam.
5. having a bad disposition; ill-natured; mean: a wicked horse.
6. spiteful; malevolent; vicious: a wicked tongue.
7. extremely troublesome or dangerous: wicked roads.
8. unpleasant; foul: a wicked odor.
9. Slang. wonderful; great; masterful; deeply satisfying: He blows a wicked trumpet.
–adverb
10. Slang. very; really; totally: That shirt is wicked cool.

It is clear from the speech that contained the phrase "wickedly great" that Farrakhan was not using wicked in it's common slang usage, which eliminates definitions 9 and 10 and leaves us with definitions 1 through 8, none of which are "positive"

Thus when we put "wickedly" with "great" we get:

evil(ly) unusual or considerable in degree.
evil(ly) notable, remarkable and exceptionally outstanding.
evil(ly) important. Highly significant or consequential in an evil manner.
etc.

clearly there is no way, except in the fanciful imaginations of those of the employ of the ADL, AIPAC and others trained in the art of Farrakhan hating, that the statement "Hitler was wickedly great." can be taken for positive admiration for Hitler.

So exactly what was the reason for putting Farrakhan on air last night? Well it actually was an attack on Obama. That was revealed when the question was asked about whether Obama was afraid of "controversial" black figures such as Farrakhan and Al Sharpton. Farrakhan wisely dodged the question, but the real answer is yes he is. That was shown in my oft cited refusal to comment on the Sean Bell murder. I have covered this ground extensively already so I won't go through it here, but needless to say such a position underscores the point that Obama's "lack of blackness" is very much in play and not entirely about genetics either.

Technorati Tags: Al Sharpton, Barak Obama, critique, Leadership, Farrakhan

Fall, Dem a fall..

Abramahoff.....Libby....Bush,Cheney,Rummy and Condi?

WASHINGTON, March 6 — I. Lewis Libby Jr., the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, was convicted today of lying to F.B.I. agents and grand jurors investigating the unmasking of a C.I.A. operative amid a burning dispute over the war in Iraq.

The jury rejected Mr. Libby’s claims of memory lapses as it convicted him of obstruction of justice, giving false statements to the F.B.I. and perjuring himself, charges embodied in four of the five counts of the indictment.

Too bad Conyers doesn't have the balls to put impeachment on the table.