*Hip Hop Republican*

Friday, December 29, 2006

"A History of Ghost-Riding"

Guy ghostriding gets his car stolen









Hip-Hop Car Stunt Leaves 2 Dead

By GARANCE BURKE

Associated Press Writer


"Ghost riding the whip" _ a stunt in which a driver gets out of his car and dances around and on top of the slowly moving vehicle to a thumping hip-hop beat _ has gotten at least two people killed, led to numerous injuries and alarmed police on the West Coast and beyond.
A fad among devotees of a West Coast strain of hip-hop music called "hyphy," the stunt has been celebrated in song and performed in numerous homemade videos posted on YouTube.

"It did not take Einstein to look at this thing and say this was a recipe for disaster," said Pete Smith, a police spokesman in Stockton. "We could see the potential for great injury or death."

Earlier this month, Davender Gulley, a ghost-riding 18-year-old, died after his head slammed into a parked car while he was hanging out the window of an SUV in Stockton, police said. In October, a 36-year-old man dancing on top of a moving car fell off, hit his head and died in what authorities said was Canada's first ghost riding fatality.

The stunt has also led to numerous minor injuries.

Hyphy was born in the San Francisco Bay cities of Oakland, Richmond and Vallejo in the late 1990s, and devotees often hold late-night car rallies called "sideshows" where crowds perform risky stunts, including ghost riding.

"Ghost riding" refers to the absence of a driver. "The whip" is urban slang for your car. Typically, the driver drops the car into neutral and dances around and on top of the vehicle while it inches forward.

Sometimes it is a solo act; sometimes a half-dozen or more passengers get out and dance, too. The stunt is usually performed late at night, on a deserted road or in a parking lot.

The Vallejo-bred rapper E-40 introduced mainstream listeners to ghost riding with the single "Tell Me When to Go," whose lyrics describe how to pull it off. Another single, "Ghostride It," by Oakland rapper Mistah F.A.B., offers a step-by-step guide: "Pull up. Hop out, all in one motion. Dancing on the hood, while the car still rollin'."

The antics have gone nationwide thanks in large part to YouTube, where a search for ghost riding turns up hundreds of grainy videos of young people pulling the stunt. The videos were shot from Portland, Ore., to Chicago and many places in between, and judging from the backdrops, the phenomenon has crossed over from the inner city to the suburbs.

Joe Calderon, 17, of San Diego, posted a YouTube video of himself dancing alongside his moving, driverless 2005 Mazda. "We love that style of music," he said. But "my mom wasn't too thrilled about it."

Another video shows a man sitting on the roof of his fast-moving pickup truck and leaping clear seconds before it crashes into a telephone pole.

Where record labels see hyphy as hip hop's next big thing, police see a menace.

Stockton police said they have written more than 1,500 citations and impounded about 400 vehicles since late March for sideshow antics.

The spontaneous nature of the sideshows _ which are staged on interstates, in deserted parking lots, and on downtown streets _ keeps police guessing. Departments have spent millions in overtime policing the outlaw rallies.

Even F.A.B. concedes that sideshows have gotten out of control. He said he would like to stage sideshows in large arenas where organizers could charge admission.

"It would be like a ghetto NASCAR," he said.


Ghost ride

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

To ghost ride,ride the slumper, frequently used in the context of "ghost riding the whip" (a "whip" being a vehicle) or simply ghostin' is when the driver and/or passengers of any given vehicle exit while it is still rolling and dance beside it or
on the hood or roof. Ghost riding is one of the latest trends to be popularized by Hyphy culture, which originated in the Bay Area of California. The act is one of the highest forms of "going dumb" and a representation of the style of hyphy. The term "ghost ride the whip" was given nationwide exposure in E-40's 2006 song Tell Me When to Go. However, E-40 was not the first to use this term, as it was coined much earlier by other Bay Area rappers such as Mac Dre.

Ghost Riding was also featured in an episode of The Girls Next Door When Kendra demonstrated the game for the other girls. The game ended predictably when Kendra's Escalade crashed into a stationary vehicle.Ghost riding as a term also has a history in motorcross and stunt cycling. The rider typically jumps off the back of the bike then runs after it and jumps back on.


http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/12/29/D8MAMLF00.html

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=ghost+ride+the+whip

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_ride

JOSEPH C. PHILLIPS COMMENTARY: The Power Of Words


"There is a short story I have heard of.
Rather than protest the displaying of the confederate battle flag with marches and boycotts, Black folks decide to fly the flag at their homes, wear it on clothing and put it on their automobiles. Once Black people claimed it as their own, White folks wouldn't want anything else to do with it or so the theory goes. Taking ownership of it would deny the symbol of its power. As intrigued as I am by the story, I do not recall the author's name nor do I imagine such a strategy would result in triumph. In fact, I am fairly certain such a tactic would backfire horribly resulting in the display of more confederate flags than any of us could stomach.


Moreover, I can not imagine why on earth I would want to claim ownership of a symbol that represents my dehumanization? The story bears some similarities to the ongoing debate about the Black community's ownership of the word N___r or what we now refer to as the 'N-word.' Our claim to the word has expanded its use and even taken it international. A friend of mine tells of being in Bosnia and being greeted on the street by a young Slavic boy with a hearty, 'what up my n____r!' Baggy pants and Coca Cola are not the only things imported from America. There is of course the claim that the Black use of the word is different - We say N___a instead of N___r.

Admittedly, there is a difference between the word as used by the likes of Richard Pryor and what we heard pour forth from Michael Richards during his Laugh Factory break down a few weeks ago. However, words have meaning. Richards gave us a taste of the word's true gruesomeness. The actor didn't just use the word, he breathed life into it. Understand that Richards' tirade would have been as foul without the word. A description of lynching and pitch forks in various parts of the human anatomy is offensive and, as it happens, exactly what the word itself represents. Thanks to modern technology the word showed itself in the stark light of morning and we were repulsed.


That is as it should be. We are fooling ourselves if we believe the artistry of Pryor or the inanities of the new minstrels (or the addition of an 'a' rather than an 'er') somehow transform the word's meaning. Another tape making the internet rounds features two Black boys brawling in their backyard as their families egg them on. The use of the word on that tape reeks with contempt and subjection. It is as vulgar as Richards Laugh Factory rant. More so. So, why we would claim a word that's sole purpose was to tell black people that we weren't fit to walk the earth? And then use it as a term of affection for one another no less?"

Thursday, December 28, 2006

ABOUT BLACK AMERICANS - RELIGION

2004 Black Entertainment Television/CBS poll, 2003 & 2004 Pew Research Center surveys, 2003 Harris Poll, 2004 Religion and Ethics Newsweekly survey

71% Protestant, 15% non-denominational Christian, 7% Catholic, 4% no religion, 2% Muslim, 1% other

Evangelical Christian rate: 62% say Bible is God's literal word
Religious service attendance: 41% attend every week, 22% a few times a year, 19% once or twice a month, 12% almost every week, 6% never

96% believe in God
76% believe in the devil
86% believe in heaven
77% believe in hell
88% believe in Jesus Christ's resurrection
79% say soul survives after death
78% believe in the Virgin birth
90% believe in miracles
29% believe in reincarnation
Islam is fastest-growing religion (40% of U.S. Muslims are black)
USA has special protection from God: 58% yes, 28% no, 14% don't know
USA's strength & success is based on religious faith: 69% yes, 28% no
Must believe in God to be moral: 69% yes, 25% no
87% believe USA moral values are on the wrong track
Views of Muslim Americans: 58% favorable, 22% unfavorable, 20% don't know
Views of Muslims abroad: 52% favorable, 30% unfavorable, 18% don't know

Lessons of 9/11: 58% say religion has too little influence in the world, 22% say too much

42% believe Jews were responsible for Jesus' death

Israel fulfills biblical prophecy: 51% yes, 33% no, 16% don't know

How religion affects their vote: 26% frequently, 20% occasionally, 51% rarely
Proper for media to ask politicians about religion: 59% yes, 39% no

Should religious institutions express political views: 66% yes, 30% no
President Bush, religion, and policymaking: 56% relies too little on religion, 28% right amount, 8% too much

Consider not voting for president (can pick more than one): 51% atheists, 30% Muslim, 17% Catholic, 12% Jewish, 10% evangelical Christian

Philly's drug dealers: Younger all the time



By SIMONE WEICHSELBAUM

DRESSED IN A black Dickies suit and black Timberlands, the chubby-faced 17-year-old crack dealer paced around the desolate lot working another graveyard shift.

In the darkness, a steady stream of addicts ambled toward him to make a buy. Then he saw a familiar face: his close friend's mom. "I need a nick," she mumbled to him. Without hesitation, he sold her a nickel bag - $5 worth of crack.

"I was surprised that she was a smoker," Mikey recalled, months after that night. Today he calls it "the deal I will never forget."

"I was thinking that a real friend wouldn't sell to his mom," said Mikey. "If he found out, how would he feel? But that is life. If she won't get it from me, she will get it from somewhere else."

On the toughest, meanest streets of Philadelphia, hundreds of youngsters like Mikey live by the rule that money is thicker than anything - even loyalty.

It is one of the most appalling features of Philadelphia's deadly year of crime: The youngest drug dealers are getting younger.

Cops consider Mikey a veteran dealer. (It's not his real name; he asked that his identity be obscured to protect him from other dealers who don't want the details of their business exposed.)

Drug dealing now attracts children as young as 10, and top police brass admit they are only beginning to scratch the surface of the kiddie drug world.

More children selling drugs means more children being shot. Among the biggest increases in shooting victims this year are 14-year-olds, police said.

Sometimes, the innocent are caught in the crossfire: The men behind the shooting death of 5-year-old Cashae Rivers - who was killed in her family's car on a Strawberry Mansion street in September - had drug records that stretched back to their teens.

"Drug corners are every police officer's problem," Police Commissioner Sylvester Johnson said. "I am holding everyone accountable. This is the new focus."

Seeking to understand why some Philadelphia kids risk their lives to sell poison, the Daily News spent weeks with a teenage drug dealer in the Abbotsford Homes public-housing complex in North Philadelphia, and also visited a busy drug corner in West Kensington filled with high-school hustlers - and found that:

• Kids are lured by cheap promises of cash and respect - currency hard to find elsewhere in a city in which 40 percent of public-school kids drop out and the supply of menial jobs for those without a diploma is shrinking.

• All too frequently, the corner life is the entrance door to violent crime. Young dealers often carry guns and stand exposed to thugs twice their age, who are quick to pull triggers and spill blood to win turf.

Mikey started selling at 12, the age when he also bought a revolver from another kid in exchange for $50 worth of weed. He has sold marijuana and crack cocaine off and on for five years. He has one gun arrest.

Mikey and other young drug dealers say they don't fear death.

"Most people don't stop hustling," Mikey said. "They are scared of the real world. So they stay on the streets."

Another dealer, "Donnie," 16, and his corner crew laughed when asked about murder. Donnie is proud of being a "corner boy." He said he and his pals sell crack around Clearfield and Hartville streets in West Kensington, where the only open businesses are bodegas and barbershops.

"I am not scared," Donnie said, his skinny frame hidden under his tan Edison High School uniform and an oversize black Rocawear jacket that reached his knees.

"I don't care," he shrugged. "You are going to die anyway."

Donnie excused himself. An emerald-green Oldsmobile driven by a man in his 20s pulled up to the corner. Donnie slinked into the back seat.

"That's his old head," said one of the boys, using street slang for mentor. He was Donnie's boss.

The car sped off.

How to buy six pairs of white Nikes

A desire for designer clothes and shoes drove both Mikey and Donnie to the street corners, or so they say.

Their families couldn't support their hunger for blue jeans, Nike sneakers, Lacoste shirts. The boys said they had no other choice but to find the easiest and closest job available: hustling.

"I had to do me," said Donnie, explaining in street slang that he had to survive. The lanky teen boasted that he'd bought six pairs of $75 white Nike Air Force sneakers after his first crack payday at age 14. That way, he wouldn't have to clean his old pair.

Rule One of urban chic: Keep your sneakers spotless.

Those reasons seem superficial, but the truth is that drug dealing can seem an appealing career in tough city neighborhoods void of healthy businesses and jobs.

Forty percent of city residents over age 15 are out of work and not collecting unemployment, according to U.S. Census data. One-quarter of Philadelphians live in poverty, which can be difficult to escape.

Computers have become central to most city businesses, yet too many kids can barely read at the grade level for their age group, said Elijah Anderson, an urban sociologist at the University of Pennsylvania. Four of 10 public-school students never earn a diploma, according to a recent report on Philadelphia's dropout epidemic.

"They feel alienated," Anderson said. They embrace the street life because "it is functional. You rely on yourself."

And so, in many tough neighborhoods, the economy is made up of low-wage jobs, government-funded checks, and an "idiosyncratic, irregular underground economy of bartering, hustling, and begging," Anderson said.

Complicating that mix, single mothers and their children have lost a legal source of income to welfare reform that put five-year limits on assistance.

"In this distress, drug dealers are becoming younger and younger," Anderson said.

One narcotics cop said recently that teen dealers typically don't know their Social Security numbers. Some mfay not have them.

Since 2004, more than 2,000 Philadelphia juveniles have been arrested for selling cocaine-based drugs, the most popular product among young dealers. The largest increase in those arrests has been in the 10-to-12 age group.

More than 800 children under 18 have been arrested in Philadelphia for gun crimes since 2004, and kids are being shot at a record rate. Fourteen-year-olds have had one of the highest jumps, said Deputy Police Commissioner Patricia Giorgio Fox. Cops counted 14 shooting victims in that age group during the first eight months of 2006, compared with six victims during the same time in 2005.

"This is our future," Fox said. "Something has to make these kids see differently."

Yet Mikey thinks hustling leads to success faster than a high-school diploma.

Mikey proudly cited one 30-something dealer he knows who invested his drug money in several North Philadelphia barbershops. Another dealer opened up a recording studio.

"They went legit," Mikey said with a proud smile.

Andre Chin, 26, case manager in the probationary program Don't Fall Down in the Hood, said Mikey is one of 50 boys with whom he works who have been charged with gun and drug crimes. The youngest, he said, is a 13-year-old boy charged with selling drugs.

Mikey told him how hard it is to turn his life around, Chin said: His mother was too sick to chase after him, his father was gone, and the streets were more welcoming than his own house.

Mikey and the other boys in Don't Fall Down can save themselves only if they stay away from older drug dealers and focus on school, Chin warned.

"A lot of these kids need a father figure in their lives," Chin said. "They only have a mother at home who is busy raising four or five kids on below a minimum wage. Then there is a man on the corner who can give these boys the money that their mothers can't give them."

Pre-teen and dealing

Mikey had a rough start in life.

His mom, relatives say, busted her knees as she escaped from a West Philadelphia apartment fire with her two young daughters, three years before Mikey's birth. His mom told a Daily News reporter she's in too much pain to talk about her son.

Mikey's father lives in the Midwest and never talks to him. His two older sisters, ages 32 and 26, moved out of Abbotsford years ago, leaving their baby brother to fend for himself.

By 12, Mikey rarely went to class.

Instead, he spent his mornings hanging around Abbotsford Homes with his role model - a drug dealer with wads of cash.

The young man taught Mikey the fun side of being a hustler. He bought Mikey a PlayStation and took him on drives in his blue Pontiac and his orange Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme.

He introduced Mikey to the essence of being a man in their neighborhood - hustling while armed.

"You can find an old head and he don't care that much about you," Mikey said. "He knew I had potential to stand on the block with a gun on my hip."

Mikey heeded the advice and started to sell weed.

"I didn't notice it at first," said Mikey's oldest sister, Shirley, 32. "My brother could do no wrong." (Her name has been changed to protect Mikey's identity.)

Shirley wanted to confront the older men in Abbotsford, but she knew better than to get involved with hustlers.

"They would protect him," she said. "I guess they are respected because of their quote-unquote power."

His family caught wind of his new job and sent him to live near Harrisburg with one of his adult sisters.

But Mikey couldn't give up the fast money.

His Philadelphia connections set him up with a dealing gig in his new housing project outside Harrisburg.

Mikey needed protection. He traded $50 worth of marijuana for a stolen "cowboy gun," a .22-caliber revolver.

"That is how it is in the drug game," Mikey said. "You need a gun so nobody will mess with you."

During his trips back home, Mikey studied crack: how to package it, how to make it, how to use gimmicks to persuade addicts to come back.

At 14, he was ready for a promotion.

Mikey's Abbotsford contact handed him pre-packaged baggies of crack to sell in Harrisburg. He had trouble pricing it.

"I was selling big $20 rocks for $5," he said. "I was messing my money up."

Still, Mikey became tough.

He broke juvenile curfew and cost his family a $375 fine. He pulled his cowboy gun on a group of boys who shouted in his face. A warrant was issued for his arrest.

Mikey moved back to Abbotsford and enrolled as a freshman at Roxborough High School. But instead of going to class, Mikey made money without a middleman.

He bought 8-balls, or 1/8-ounce bags of cocaine, from various dealers across the city. He carried the white powder back to Abbotsford and usually paid an addict $10 worth of the finished product to use the addict's kitchen.

The two mixed the concoction with baking soda, boiled it down with water, cooled it off, and smashed the rock into tiny pebbles.

Mikey hated the salty smell of the cooked drug, but his helper liked to take deep breaths as the white paste simmered on the stove.

At 15, Mikey had a routine. His workday began at 3 p.m., even after a typical morning of skipping school. As users called his pre-paid cell phone with their orders, Mikey raced around Abbotsford on a minibike with his crack baggies stuffed in his pockets.

When he got tired, he went to his usual spot.

"I would just walk down the strip or stand on top of the hill," he said. "People know where I would be at."

In darkness, the tree-lined complex is hidden from the city. It sits atop a nondescript hill where the grass is always cut and children play tag in the streets.

Shiny new Mercedes and Cadillacs sit doubled-parked on the complex's curvy roads. The SUVs belong to the older dealers, who often return to Abbotsford to show off their wealth, Mikey said.

He wanted to live like them and one day open a business.

When Mikey worked hard, he made more than $1,400 a night. He usually aimed to clock 15-hour shifts, especially at the beginning of the month, when addicts received their government checks.

He bought mostly clothes and fast food with the cash. Not wanting to look like a thug, he typically dressed in preppy clothes such as tapered blue jeans, Lacoste shirts and white Adidas sneakers.

Mikey, whose chubby cheeks, bright eyes and wide smile give him an innocent look, never seemed like a criminal.

But, he said, "once money touches your hand, that is all you think about."

Giving up freedom

In September 2004, cops nabbed Mikey near the old Budd Co. building on Hunting Park Avenue in East Falls with $200 worth of crack in his pockets.

Authorities learned of the outstanding warrant for his gun charge. Mikey's decision to pull out his cowboy gun had caught up with him.

Ten months later, Mikey was sentenced to Don't Fall Down in the Hood, the juvenile probationary program.

He hated it. "I'd rather do my bid" - his jail sentence - he always said.

Mikey left Roxborough for De La Salle Vocational School in Bensalem. The school gave him the chance to graduate with a high-school diploma and earn a certificate in general carpentry. Teachers told Mikey that carpenters can earn more than $90,000 a year. But Mikey didn't care. He rarely went to class and continued to sell drugs for another six months.

This past March, Mikey's mother found a pile of crack baggies in her daughter's old bedroom. Mikey admitted he sold drugs despite being on probation. Still, Chin pushed for Mikey to stay in the program and asked Mikey to promise to quit.

"He needs a male figure who is constantly there," said Chin, who believed in Mikey.

When Mikey ditched Don't Fall Down classes at Temple University, Chin drove around Abbotsford to find him.

When Mikey complained that he didn't have enough money to ride SEPTA to the university, Chin gave him tokens.

Still, Mikey became broke and frustrated.

He managed to save $4,200 during the winter, but loaned his last $800 to a friend for bail money. He was tempted to hustle. Mikey struggled to avoid the streets. He even contemplated working at a Bensalem McDonald's that paid about $7.50 an hour.

"If I got a job, I would want to hustle again," he said, explaining that he'd use hard-earned money to buy drugs and sell the dope for more.

Donnie, meanwhile, disappeared. By the end of the summer, he had left his West Kensington corner and couldn't be reached again.

In September, Mikey gave up. He saved himself the only way he knew how. He turned over his freedom, telling a judge at a scheduled hearing that he didn't want to be part of his probationary program anymore and was willing to enter a juvenile institution. Mikey knew that he didn't have the family support or the will to stay off the streets.

Mikey is now serving a minimum six-month sentence at Saint Gabriel's Hall in Audubon, Montgomery County, a boarding school for young criminals.

"I always say that a kid who asked to be placed is showing signs of maturity and is also a cry for help," Chin said. "Maybe things will work out for him."

http://www.philly.com/mld/dailynews/16325574.htm

The Black Republican College Network

The HBCU Republican Connection is a forum for Republican HBCU students to share, debate and network.

Meet the future of the Republican party!

http://www.hbcugop.blogspot.com/

Wednesday, December 27, 2006

OP-ED



By Stanley Crouch

The modOP-ED: Past Can Jolt Us To A Better Futureerate-conservative columnist discusses the evolution of popular music's lessons in American culture: "I became even more convinced of the music's lessons in our culture as I looked at a recent documentary about the making of the forthcoming 'Dreamgirls' movie and two books, 'Cole Porter Selected Lyrics' and 'Motown in Love: Lyrics from the Golden Era.' "Dreamgirls" is a fictionalized story of a group of young black women with allusions to the story of Motown's Diana Ross and the Supremes.

Even if it does not live up to the hype, the film should remind audiences of one thing that they may have forgotten: Once upon a recent time there were black men and women who could sing notes and not merely chant gutter doggerel. The lyrics back then also did not constantly refer to men and women in demeaning and derogatory terms. The movie will also remind audiences that there was a time when women in the music business knew that being successful did not include embracing the looks and manners of hookers or women taking a break at a strip club."He continues: "The book of Cole Porter lyrics and the best of the Motown lyricists might surprise people who spend too much time listening to pop radio, where a good number of words are bleeped. Porter was about as good as one could get at the writing of lyrics, and he consistently showed off great invention, wit and sophistication.

It is unnecessary to compare the songs of Porter with those intended for adolescents, the target audience for many Motown songs. In their gleaming outfits, the Motown singers performed in the community theaters where young men and women went to learn something about how to express the feelings they might have for each other. Because something that strong existed in popular music it is hard to believe that it has largely disappeared and been replaced by the dreck we hear delivered by those from the world of rap. But perhaps we are only in one of the valleys on the roller coaster that this culture can so often be, reaching unprecedented highs and falling to lows so far below the sewer that we cannot believe what we are witnessing."

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/col/scrouch/

Malcolm X Quotes



Malcolm X, born Malcolm Little, also known as Detroit Red and Al-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz (Omaha, Nebraska, May 19, 1925February 21, 1965 in New York City) was a Black Muslim Minister and National Spokesman for the Nation of Islam. He was also founder of the Muslim Mosque, Inc. and the Organization of Afro-American Unity.

During his life, Malcolm went from being a drug dealer and burglar[1] to one of the most prominent black nationalist leaders in the United States; he was considered by some as a martyr of Islam and a champion of equality. As a militant leader, Malcolm X advocated black pride, economic self-reliance, and identity politics. He ultimately rose to become a world-renowned African American/Pan-Africanist and human rights activist.

Following a pilgrimage to Mecca in 1964, Malcolm converted to orthodox Islam. Less than a year later he was assassinated in Washington Heights on the first day of National Brotherhood Week. Although three members of the Nation of Islam were convicted of his assassination (one of whom confessed), there are several conspiracy theories positing the involvement of elements of the United States Government.


Nobody can give you freedom. Nobody can give you equality or justice or anything. If you're a man, you take it.


You can't separate peace from freedom because no one can be at peace unless he has his freedom.

I am not a racist.... In the past I permitted myself to be used...to make sweeping indictments of all white people, the entire white race and these generalizations have caused injuries to some whites who perhaps did not deserve to be hurt.

Because of the spiritual enlightenment which I was blessed to receive as a result of my recent pilgrimage to the Holy city of Mecca, I no longer subscribe to sweeping indictments of any one race. I am now striving to live the life of a true...Muslim. I must repeat that I am not a racist nor do I subscribe to the tenants of racism. I can state in all sincerity that I wish nothing but freedom, justice and equality, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all people."

For 12 long years I lived within the narrow-minded confines of the 'straightjacket world' created by my strong belief that Elijah Muhammad was a messenger direct from God Himself, and my faith in what I now see to be a pseudo-religious philosophy that he preaches.... I shall never rest until I have undone the harm I did to so many well-meaning, innocent Negroes who through my own evangelistic zeal now believe in him even more fanatically and more blindly than I did."

"I had blind faith in him. My faith in Elijah Muhammad was more blind and more uncompromising than any faith that any man has ever had for another man. And so I didn't try and see him as he actually was."


"The thing that you have to understand about those of us in the Black Muslim movement was that all of us believed 100 percent in the divinity of Elijah Muhammad. We believed in him. We actually believed that God, in Detroit by the way, that God had taught him and all of that. I always believed that he believed in himself. And I was shocked when I found out that he himself didn't believe it. And when that shock reached me, then I began to look everywhere else and try to get a better understanding of the things that confront all of us so that we can get together in some kind of way to offset them."

-Malcolm X


Hard Questions About Hip Hop





By ERIK ECKHOLM

CHICAGO — Byron Hurt takes pains to say that he is a fan of hip-hop, but over time, says Mr. Hurt, a 36-year-old filmmaker, dreadlocks hanging below his shoulders, “I began to become very conflicted about the music I love.”

A new documentary by Mr. Hurt, “Hip Hop: Beyond Beats and Rhymes,” questions the violence, degradation of women and homophobia in much of rap music.

Scheduled to go on the air in February as part of the PBS series Independent Lens, the documentary is being shown now at high schools, colleges and Boy’s Clubs, and in other forums, as part of an unusual public campaign sponsored by the Independent Television Service, which is based in San Francisco and helped finance the film.

The intended audiences include young fans, hip-hop artists and music industry executives — black and white — who profit from music and videos that glorify swagger and luxury, portray women as sex objects, and imply, critics say, that education and hard work are for suckers and sissies.

What concerns Mr. Hurt and many black scholars is the domination of the hip-hop market by more violent and sexually demeaning songs and videos — an ascendancy, the critics say, that has coincided with the growth of the white audience for rap and the growing role of large corporations in marketing the music.

Ronald F. Ferguson, a black economist and education expert at Harvard, said that the global success of hip-hop had had positive influences on the self-esteem of black youths but that children who became obsessed with it “may unconsciously adopt the themes in this music as their lens for viewing the world.”

With the commercial success of gangsta rap and music videos, which portray men as extravagant thugs and women as sex toys, debate has simmered among black parents, community leaders and scholars about the impact of rap and the surrounding hip-hop culture.

“There’s a conversation going on now; a lot more people are trying to figure out a way to intervene that’s productive,” said Tricia Rose, a professor of Africana studies at Brown University.

At one extreme are critics, both black and white, who put primary blame for the failures and isolation of urban black youth on a self-destructive subculture, exemplified by the worst of hip-hop. But many of those critics, Dr. Rose said, fail to acknowledge the deeper roots of the problems. At the other extreme are people who reflexively defend any artistic expression by young blacks, saying the focus must remain on the economic and political structures that hem in minorities.

“That’s the real catch,” Dr. Rose said. “The public conversation about hip-hop is pinned by two responses, neither of them productive.”

Among blacks, to criticize rap, especially in front of the wider society, is to risk being called disloyal, said William Jelani Cobb, a historian at Spelman College in Atlanta, at a recent screening of the film in Newark. But the exaggerated image of male aggression, said Dr. Cobb, who also speaks in the documentary, actually reflects male insecurity and longstanding powerlessness, while the image of women resembles that held by 19th century slave owners.

Chris Bennett, 36, took his daughters, ages 15 and 11, to see Mr. Hurt’s film in Chicago because he said he wanted them to think about the music. Mr. Bennett, a school security guard, said he saw the effects of gangsta rap in his job. “Everyone wants to be tough now,” he said. “Everyone wants to be hard, and education has taken the background.”

The event in Chicago drew some 250 people, including several high school groups. Many of the boys were skeptical about the supposed dire influences of rap. Jock Lucas, 16, hotly argued with female students about the prevalence of lyrics that denigrate women, asserting, as many of the boys did, that a girl who dressed provocatively deserved such labels and might even like them.

“I don’t think rap is a bad influence,” Jock said. “They’re just speaking about how it goes where they come from. If the people who listen go out and do these things, it’s their own fault.”

Another high school student at the Chicago event, Vasawa Robinson, 19, said rap showed “real life” and that “if you try to show a different picture, the kids won’t want to listen.” The more political, socially conscious rap, Vasawa said, was for an older generation.

Mr. Hurt’s film includes clips from a music video by the rapper 50 Cent, from his album “Get Rich or Die Tryin’, ” in which the singer re-enacts a drive-by shooting he survived and boasts in crude terms of his power and readiness to kill his enemies.

It also includes portions of the video “Tip Drill,” an extended fantasy of male sexual domination by the rap star Nelly, who has won praise by promoting literacy and bone marrow donations, but, as the film notes, also markets a drink called Pimp Juice.

Mr. Hurt, who grew up in a black neighborhood of Central Islip, N.Y., in modest circumstances, was quarterback of the Northeastern University football team and said he had been a fanatical “hip-hop head.”

“It was music created by people your age who looked like you , talked like you, dressed like you and weren’t apologetic about it,” he said.

His views changed, he said, when, after college, he worked in a program teaching male athletes about violence against women.

“Here’s the conflict,” Mr. Hurt said. “You still love hip-hop and you love to see the artists doing well, but then you ask, ‘What are they saying? What is the image of manhood?’ ”

White males may be major customers, Mr. Hurt said, “but it influences black kids the most.”

“They’re the ones who order their days around it,” he said, “who try to conform to the script.”


-I don't think rap is a bad influence," Jock said. "They're just speaking about how it goes where they come from.

False.

They're speaking about how they IMAGINE it goes when they turn their adolescent imaginations loose. They're saying anything it takes to attract the attention of a producer.

They're wondering how they can have "street cred" when the "street" involved is a naive, melodramatic fantasy. And they're doing all of this instead of getting educated and taking up the rights and duties they have coming to them. It's sad, really.

Republicans and the Civil rights movement


Image is everything especially in the business of politics and race. The picture of Lyndon Johnson siging the civil Rights act of 1964 gaves a false impression to millions that Republicans sat on there hands why Democrats passed laws for oppressed blacks in the south.
This of course is in many ways the same kind of spin the Democrats use whenb they say that Bill Clinton passed "welfare reform". The truth is he signed it into law but it was Republicans who advocated for it.


The left likes to pretend that the civil rights movement began in the 1960's any one with a basic knowledge of that time knows that such a suggestion is naive to say the very least. For the left to credit Democrats for the civil rights movement is absurd. The other myth that democrats throw around is that every single racist Democrat from that era switched to the Republican party.


But on occasion they are force to admit some survived till this day since a few are still in the parties leadership position. In 1964, the Civil Rights Act was filibustered for 14 hours by Democrat Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV) a former Klu Klux Klansman, and a current US Senator (still a D-WV).

FACTS
(Do Not Let Democrats Rewrite History)


The Civil Rights Act of 1964..who voted for who voted against


Vote statistics



Vote totals



Totals are in "Yea-Nay" format:
The Original House Version: 290-130 (69%-31%)
The
Senate Version: 73-27 (73%-27%)
The Senate Version, as voted on by the House: 289-126 (70%-30%)






By party Vote



The original House version:
Democratic Party: 153-96 (61%-39%)
Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)




The Senate version:
Democratic Party: 46-22 (68%-32%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)



The Senate version, voted on by the House:
Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%-37%)
Republican Party: 136-35 (80%-20%)




Switches in position:



"Yea" to "Nay":
Earl Wilson (R-IN), Bob Wilson (R-CA), and Charlotte T. Reid (R-IL)
"Nay" to "Yea":
John Jacob Rhodes (R-AZ), J. Edward Hutchinson (R-MI), and Charles Weltner (D-GA).





List - Republican Firsts



August 6, 1965 - Voting Rights Act of 1965, abolishing literacy tests and other measures devised by Democrats to prevent African-Americans from voting, signed into law; higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats vote in favor

May 17, 1954 - Chief Justice Earl Warren, three-term Republican Governor (CA) and Republican vice presidential nominee in 1948, wins unanimous support of Supreme Court for school desegregation in Brown v. Board of Education

May 2, 1963 - Republicans condemn Democrat sheriff of Birmingham, AL for arresting over 2,000 African-American schoolchildren marching for their civil rights


July 27, 1960 - At Republican National Convention, Vice President and eventual presidential nominee Richard Nixon insists on strong civil rights plank in platform


December 16, 2003 - President George W. Bush signs law creating National Museum of African American History and Culture

November 17, 2003 - First generation immigrant, Austrian-American Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger, sworn in as Governor of California

May 23, 2003 - U.S. Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) introduces bill to establish National Museum of African American History and Culture

May 8, 2003 - Speaker Dennis Hastert, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, and other Republican leaders gather at Frederick Douglass National Historic Site, announce $1 million restoration effort

January 13, 2003 - Jennette Bradley (R-OH) becomes first African-American woman to be Lt. Governor of a state

December 20, 2000 - California Republican Ann Veneman nominated as first woman to be U.S. Secretary of Agriculture

December 17, 2000 - Republican Alberto Gonzales named as first Hispanic to serve as White House Counsel by President George W. Bush

December 15, 2000 - President-elect George W. Bush nominates Colin Powell as first African-American Secretary of State

December 5, 2000 - Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) becomes first woman elected to U.S. Senate Leadership

December 3, 2002 - Jewish Republican Linda Lingle (R-HI) inaugurated as state’s first woman governor

November 26, 2002 - Republican Judy Baar Topinka becomes first woman to chair either major party in Illinois

November 13, 2002 - U.S. Rep. Deborah Pryce (R-OH) elected as Chair of House Republican Conference; she is highest-ranking woman in House majority leadership in U.S. history

November 5, 2002 - Michael Steele, former Chairman of Maryland Republican Party, elected as first African-American Lt. Governor in state history

November 12, 2001 - President George W. Bush proclaims National American Indian Heritage Month

September 4, 2001 - Republican U.S. Senate selects Alfonso Lenhardt as first African-American Sergeant at Arms

July 25, 2001 - California Republican Gaddi Vasquez nominated by President George W. Bush as first Hispanic to be Director of the Peace Corps

May 9, 2001 - President George W. Bush nominates Miguel Estrada to be first Hispanic to serve on U.S. Court of Appeals for D.C. Circuit; Democrats in Senate successfully filibuster nomination

January 11, 2001 - Republican Elaine Chao, first Asian-American woman to hold a cabinet position, nominated as U.S. Secretary of Labor

January 20, 2001 - Mississippi Republican Rod Paige is confirmed as first African-American U.S. Secretary of Education

January 22, 2001 - Republican Condoleezza Rice becomes first woman and second African-American to serve as U.S. National Security Advisor

January 24, 2001 - Republican Mel Martínez, appointed by President George W. Bush as U.S. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, becomes first Cuban-American in Cabinet

January 30, 2001 - Republican Gale Norton, appointed by President George W. Bush, becomes first woman to serve as U.S. Secretary of the Interior

June 6, 2001 - President George W. Bush issues Executive Order enhancing federal employment opportunities for Asian-Americans and Pacific Islanders

July 31, 2000 - African-American U.S. Rep. J. C. Watts (R-OK) presides over Republican National Convention in Philadelphia

April 26, 1999 - `Legislation authored by U.S. Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI) awarding Congressional Gold Medal to civil rights pioneer Rosa Parks is transmitted to President

November 28, 1989 - President George H. W. Bush establishes National Museum of the American Indian

August 20, 1996 - Bill authored by U.S. Rep. Susan Molinari (R-NY) to prohibit racial discrimination in adoptions, part of Republicans’ Contract With America, becomes law

June 25, 1996 - Death of U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Elbert Tuttle, appointed by President Dwight Eisenhower; eulogized for ensuring that Brown v. Board of Education became “a broad mandate for racial justice”

January 4, 1995 - SpeakerNewt Gingrich appoints Republican Cheryl Lau first Asian-American woman to serve as General Counsel of U.S. House;

January 4, 1995 - Republican Robin Carle becomes first woman elected Clerk of U.S. House

July 22, 1993 - Death of Roscoe Robinson, first African-American four-star general in the U.S. Army; promoted in 1982 by President Ronald Reagan

November 21, 1991 - President George H. W. Bush signs Civil Rights Act of 1991 to strengthen federal civil rights legislation

August 3, 1990 - President George H. W. Bush declares first National American Indian Heritage Month

July 26, 1990 - President George H. W. Bush signs Americans with Disabilities Act, world’s first comprehensive civil rights law for people with disabilities

May 7, 1990 - President George H. W. Bush proclaims first Asian/Pacific American Heritage Month

March 8, 1990 - Republican Evan J. Kemp appointed by President George H. W. Bush
as Chairman of U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; first person with a disability to serve on the Commission

August 29, 1989 - U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) becomes first Hispanic woman and first Cuban-American in Congress

September 13, 1988 - President Ronald Reagan proclaims first National Hispanic Heritage Week

August 10, 1988 - President Ronald Reagan signs Civil Liberties Act of 1988, compensating Japanese-Americans for deprivation of civil rights and property during World War II internment ordered by FDR

May 27, 1987 - Vietnamese-American cadet Hoang Nhu Tran, former boat person, graduates as valedictorian from U.S. Air Force Academy; nominated by U.S. Senator Bill Armstrong (R-CO)

November 4, 1986 - Republican Kay Orr of Nebraska elected as state’s first woman governor;

November 30, 1983 - Clarence Pendleton completes first term as first African-American Chairman of U.S. Civil Rights Commission; appointed by President Ronald Reagan in 1981

November 15, 1983 - President Ronald Reagan’s nominee to Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Susan Meredith Phillips, confirmed as first woman to serve as Chairman

November 2, 1983 - President Ronald Reagan makes Martin Luther King’s birthday a national holiday

October 2, 1983 - President Ronald Ronald Reagan proclaims first Minority Enterprise Development Week

May 13, 1983 - President Ronald Reagan designates first national observance of American Indian Day

May 5, 1983 - Hispanic Republican Patricia Diaz Dennis appointed by President Ronald Reagan as first Hispanic woman on National Labor Relations Board; later served as FCC Commissioner under Reagan and as Regent of Texas State University under Gov. George W. Bush

February 7, 1983 - Republican Elizabeth Dole appointed by President Ronald Reagan as first woman to be U.S. Secretary of Transportation; she would later become first woman to represent North Carolina in U.S. Senate

August 12, 1982 - Hispanic Republican Faith Evans, first woman in nation to serve as U.S. Marshal, sworn in following appointment by President Ronald Reagan

June 29, 1982 - President Ronald Reagan signs 25-year extension of 1965 Voting Rights Act

December 21, 1981 - President Ronald Reagan establishes Task Force on Legal Equality
for Women

September 25, 1981 - Republican Sandra Day O’ Connor, nominated by President Ronald Reagan, is sworn in as first woman to serve on U.S. Supreme Court

September 15, 1981 - President Ronald Reagan establishes the White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities, to increase African-American participation in federal education programs

January 29, 1981 - Jeane Kirkpatrick appointed by President Ronald Reagan as first woman to be U.S. Ambassador to United Nations

August 9, 1988 - Lauro Cavazos, first Hispanic to serve in Cabinet, nominated by President Ronald Reagan to be Secretary of Education

July 15, 1980 - NAACP President Benjamin Hooks addresses Republican National Convention; previously appointed by President Richard Nixon in 1972 as first African-American member of U.S. Civil Rights Commission

February 19, 1976 - President Gerald Ford formally rescinds President Franklin Roosevelt’s notorious Executive Order authorizing internment of over 120,000 Japanese-Americans during WWII

September 1, 1975 - Gen. Daniel James receives fourth star from Republican President Gerald Ford; first African-American to hold that rank in U.S. Air Force

April 25, 1975 - Appointed by President Gerald Ford, Dick Yin Wong becomes first Asian-American to serve as judge on a U.S. District Court

March 10, 1975 - President Gerald Ford appoints Republican Carla Hills as first woman to be U.S. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development; later first woman to be U.S. Trade Representative, appointed by President George H. W. Bush

January 14, 1975 - Republican William T. Coleman nominated as first African-American to be U.S. Secretary of Transportation

July 12, 1974 - Republican National Chairman George H. W. Bush establishes Republican National Hispanic Assembly

April 24, 1974 - James M. Rogers, Jr. is first African-American selected National Teacher of the Year, by President Richard Nixon

October 1, 1973 - Richard Cavazos promoted by President Richard Nixon to be first Hispanic Brigadier General in U.S. Army; in 1982, President Ronald Reagan made him first Hispanic four–star General

February 17, 1973 - Republican Navy Secretary John Warner commissions frigate in honor of first African-American naval aviator, Jesse L. Brown, who died in combat during Korean War

October 24, 1972 - Death of Jackie Robinson, athlete and Republican civil rights activist

October 11, 1972 - Horacio Rivero, first Hispanic four-star Admiral, appointed by President Richard Nixon as U.S. Ambassador to Spain

May 14, 1971 - Republican Senators Jacob Javits (NY) and Charles Percy (IL) appoint the first female pages in U.S. Senate

April 28, 1971 - Rear Admiral Samuel Lee Gravely becomes first African-American to achieve Flag Rank in U.S. Navy, promoted by President Richard Nixon

April 23, 1971 - Republican appointee Herbert Choy becomes first Asian-American federal judge, named by President Richard Nixon to U.S. Court of Appeals

July 8, 1970 - In special message to Congress, President Richard Nixon calls for reversal of policy of forced termination of Native American rights and benefits

August 6, 1965 - Voting Rights Act of 1965, abolishing literacy tests and other measures devised by Democrats to prevent African-Americans from voting, signed into law; higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats vote in favor

August 4, 1965 - Senate Republican Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) overcomes Democrat attempts to block 1965 Voting Rights Act; 94% of Senate Republicans vote for landmark civil right legislation, while 27% of Democrats oppose

March 21, 1965 - Republican federal judge Frank Johnson authorizes Martin Luther King’s protest march from Selma to Montgomery, overruling Democrat Governor George Wallace

June 20, 1964 - The Chicago Defender, renowned African-American newspaper, praises Senate Republican Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) for leading passage of 1964 Civil Rights Act

June 10, 1964 - Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) criticizes Democrat filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights Act, calls on Democrats to stop opposing racial equality

June 9, 1964 - Republicans condemn 14-hour filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights Act by U.S. Senator and former Ku Klux Klansman Robert Byrd (D-WV), who still serves in the Senate

January 27, 1964 - U.S. Senator Margaret Chase Smith (R-ME), first woman to be considered for nomination by a major party, announces candidacy for President; she finishes 2nd at Republican National Convention

May 2, 1963 - Republicans condemn Democrat sheriff of Birmingham, AL for arresting over 2,000 African-American schoolchildren marching for their civil rights

July 27, 1960 - At Republican National Convention, Vice President and eventual presidential nominee Richard Nixon insists on strong civil rights plank in platform

May 6, 1960 - President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republicans’ Civil Rights Act of 1960, overcoming 125-hour, around-the-clock filibuster by 18 Senate Democrats

February 4, 1959 - President Eisenhower informs Republican leaders of his plan to introduce 1960 Civil Rights Act, despite staunch opposition from many Democrats

June 23, 1958 - President Dwight Eisenhower meets with Martin Luther King and other African-American leaders to discuss plans to advance civil rights

September 24, 1957 - Sparking criticism from Democrats such as Senators John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, President Dwight Eisenhower deploys U.S. troops to Little Rock, AR to force Democrat Governor Orval Faubus to integrate public schools

September 9, 1957 - President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republican Party’s 1957 Civil Rights Act

November 6, 1956 - African-American civil rights leaders Martin Luther King and Ralph Abernathy vote for Republican Dwight Eisenhower for President

July 9, 1955 - Republican attorney E. Frederic Morrow becomes first African-American executive in White House; served as advisor to President Dwight Eisenhower

May 17, 1954 - Chief Justice Earl Warren, three-term Republican Governor (CA) and Republican vice presidential nominee in 1948, wins unanimous support of Supreme Court for school desegregation in Brown v. Board of Education


Somalis Urge Muslims Worldwide To Join Jihad

Hatip to BookerRising




Somali Islamists urged foreign Muslim fighters today to join their "holy war" against Ethiopia after days of heavy fighting between Islamist and pro-government troops (hat tip: Jihad Watch). The Islamists and pro-Somali government fighters have been firing artillery and rockets at each other across frontlines since Tuesday, killing dozens and wounding hundreds. "Our country is open to Muslims worldwide. Let them fight in Somalia and wage jihad, and God willing, attack Addis Ababa," said Islamisti defense chief Yusuf Mohamed Siad "Inda'ade". The most sustained fighting to date between the two sides has heightened fears of a major regional war that would suck in Horn of Africa rivals Ethiopia and Eritrea. Diplomats fear the Somali conflict could also trigger suicide bombings in east Africa.

Ethiopia poured scorn on the Islamists' call for international support from foreign jihadists, saying it proved the "extremism" of a movement that the Ethiopian government accuses of being run by militants linked to al Qaeda. The African Union added its voice on Saturday to U.N. and Western condemnation of the fighting and urged both sides to resume peace talks.

This week's combat started after Tuesday's expiration of a deadline that the Somalia Islamic Courts Council (SICC) had given Ethiopian troops protecting the government to leave the country or face war. The SICC accuses Christian-led Ethiopia, a U.S. ally in its war on terrorism, of invading Somalia and has said it would wage holy war against the Horn of Africa power.



My response: It is bad enough that Arab Muslims occupy vast tracts of Africa - a longtime occupation that very few folks will highlight, while folks whine bad nauseum about Israel's tiny sliver of real estate in the Middle East. Now black Muslims are advancing the interests of Arab Muslim jihadists and forcing Arab Muslim cultural values on black folks (e.g., Somalia's new entertainment rule, with no dancing or music....that is definitely foreign to black cultures), on our ancestral continent. Wonderful.

http://bookerrising.blogspot.com/



With ths passing of the "The Godfather of Soul", James Brown one is forced to the question what in hell happened to the days when R&B/Soul music had meaning?
Stevie, Aretha, Donny, Luther, Chaka, Lauryn and others have tried to pave the way slowly, but now that James Brown is gone that vision is being lost. More and more, artists are being signed without having one major component a true singing voice.People are complaining in large numbers that radio is boring. Instead of finding original and unique talent, labels are continually focusig on selling a look, rather than selling music.
May the God Father of Soul Dead of soul rest in peace!

A Bio of James Brown's Early life

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Brown was born in the small town of
Barnwell in Depression-era South Carolina as James Joseph Brown, Jr. As an adult, Brown would legally change his name to remove the "Jr." designation.

Brown's family eventually moved to nearby
Augusta, Georgia. During his childhood, Brown helped support his family by picking cotton in the nearby fields and shining shoes downtown. In his spare time, Brown variously spent time either practicing his skills in Augusta-area halls, or committing petty crimes. At the age of sixteen, he was convicted of armed robbery and sent to a juvenile detention center upstate in Toccoa from 1948.

While in prison, Brown later made the acquaintance of
Bobby Byrd, whose family helped Brown secure an early release after serving only three years of his sentence, under the condition that he not return to Augusta or Richmond County and that he would try to get a job. After brief stints as a boxer and baseball pitcher (a career move ended by leg injury) Brown turned his energy toward music.

Brown was married four times. He and his last wife, Tommie Raye Hynie (also cited as Tomi Rae Hynie), were married in 2001, but whether either marriage was legal is disputed. Tommie's prior 'husband' was a polygamist and thus her 3-day marriage to him should have never counted (i.e., since he cannot legally marry someone when he is already married). Based on this reasoning, the 2001 marriage is legal and she would be Mr Brown's wife. They had one child together, but according to Brown's attorney, the two never remarried. Brown also had two children by his first wife, Velma Warren, and three more by his second, Deidre Jenkins. His eldest son Teddy died in a car crash in 1973.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Brown
The body of soul singer James Brown will be returned Thursday to the site of his debut _ the legendary Apollo Theater in Harlem _ so the public that saw and heard him leave a lasting impression on music can see him one last time, the Rev. Al Sharpton said Tuesday.


James Brown Olympia 1966

Ethiopian Forces Near Somali Capital





Ethiopia pressed on with its offensive against Somali Islamists and threatened to seize the Somali capital, Mogadishu.

At least two Ethiopian jets fired missiles on retreating Islamist forces, prompting the interim Somali government to claim a partial victory.

Hundreds of troops have been killed during a week of heavy artillery and mortar fighting amid fears that it could spark a wider regional conflict in the Horn of Africa.

"Ethiopian forces are on their way to Mogadishu. They are about 40 miles away and it is possible they could capture it in the next 24 to 48 hours," Somalia's ambassador to Ethiopia, Abdikarin Farah, told reporters in the Ethiopian capital, Addis Ababa.

The State Department signaled support Tuesday for Ethiopian military operations against Somalia, noting that Ethiopia has had “genuine security concerns” stemming from the rise of Islamist forces in its eastern neighbor.

Department spokesman Gonzalo Gallegos also said that the Ethiopian military acted at the request of Somalia’s internationally backed secular government, which has been resisting with little success the spreading influence of the more powerful Islamist forces.

Gallegos noted that Ethiopia has said that its action is intended to prevent further aggression by the Islamic Courts militias.

More
Here & Here and if you must Al Jezzera


Ethiopians will not be playing by European Pansy rules, and as a result, in the end, the lives of tens of thousands of Somali women and hildren will be spared. Our current effort in Iraq is more bloody, for Iraqis, than it needs to be because we make war by "we want to feel good about ourselves" rules (WWTFGAO rules), which give the throat slitters and backpack bombers carte blanche.


Ethiopian airforce (imagine what they could do if they just had 4% of our air power capability?):

Combat aircraft
4 Canberra B57
20 MiG-17
28 MiG-21
19 MiG-23
26 F-5
2 Su-25
8 Su-27
Trainers
20 Aero L-39
4 Cessna T-41
16 T-33
30 T-28
36 F-86
47 Saab 91


Transport aicraft
13 An-12
2 An-26
1 An-32
3 DHC-6
13 C-47 Skytrain
2 C-54
10 C-119
2 Harbin Y-12
1 Il-14
4 C-130
1 Tu-154
1 Yak-40


Attack helicopters
5 Alouette III
2 Ka-50
16 Mi-24


Transport helicopters
1 Eurocopter Puma
6 Bell 204
16 Bell 205
2 Mi-2
22 Mi-8
2 Mi-14



Saturday, December 23, 2006

Ann Coulter Educating Liberals








The Real Santa Claus


We all we all know the fat Santa Claus with the red nose who gives out gifts on Dec 25th . Most of you who read this blog think he is just a made up person but you are wrong and as with most things the truth about Santa Claus is better than fiction .
St Nicholas was born in Asia Minor during the third century in the Greek colony of Patara in the Roman province of Lycia, at a time when the region was Hellenistic in its culture and outlook.
Nicholas became bishop of the city of Myra. He was very religious from an early age and devoted his life entirely to Christianity. He is said to have been born to relatively affluent Christian parents in Patara, Lycia, where he also received his early schooling.As the patron saint of sailors, Nicholas is claimed to have been a sailor or fisherman himself.
More likely, however, is that one of his family businesses involved managing a fishing fleet. When his parents died, Nicholas still received his inheritance but is said to have given it away to charity. So was St Nicholas a working, albeit wealthy, man who complemented his day job with caring for his congregation, or was he a full-time bishop?


The impressive list of deeds of Nicholas seems to point to the latter. This does not mean, however, that his appointment to priest or bishop meant a complete rupture with his former life. More likely this was a gradual process.Nicholas's early activities as a priest are said to have occurred during the reign of co-ruling Roman Emperors Diocletian (reigned 284305) and Maximian (reigned 286305) from which comes the estimation of his age. Diocletian issued an edict in 303 authorising the systematic persecution of Christians across the Empire. Following the abdication of the two Emperors on May 1, 305 the policies of their successors towards Christians were different. In the Western part of the Empire Constantius Chlorus (reigned 305306) put an end to the systematic persecution upon his accession to the throne.

In the Eastern part Galerius (reigned 305311) continued the persecution until 311 when he issued a general edict of toleration from his deathbed. The persecution of 303311 is considered to be the longest in the history of the Empire. Nicholas survived this period, although his activities at the time are uncertain.


Following Galerius' death his surviving co-ruler Licinius (reigned 307324) mostly tolerated Christians. As a result their community was allowed to further develop, and the various bishops who acted as their leaders managed to concentrate religious, social, and political influence as well as wealth in their hands. In many cases they acted as the heads of their respective cities. It is apparently in this period that Nicholas rose to become bishop of Myra. Judging from tradition, he was probably well loved and respected in his area, mostly as a result of his charitable activities. As with other bishops of the time, Nicholas's popularity would serve to ensure his position and influence during and after this period.


The destruction of several pagan temples is also attributed to him, among them one temple of Artemis (also known as Diana). Because the celebration of Diana's birth is on December 6, some authors have speculated that this date was deliberately chosen for Nicholas's feast day to overshadow or replace the pagan celebrations.


Nicholas is also known for coming to the defence of the falsely accused, often preventing them from being executed, and for his prayers on behalf of sailors and other travelers. The popular veneration of Nicholas as a saint seems to have started relatively early. Justinian I, Emperor of the Eastern Roman Empire (reigned 527565) is reported to have built a temple (i.e. a church building) in Nicholas's honour in Constantinople, the Roman capital of the time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Nicholas


Merry-Christmas from the guys at HipHopRepublican.com

Friday, December 22, 2006

Macy's pulls P Diddy's Coats..Dog Fur!!!!!!

-Say it ain't so




NEW YORK - Macy's has pulled from its shelves and its Web site two styles of Sean John hooded jackets, originally advertised as featuring faux fur, after an investigation by the nation's largest animal protection organization concluded that the garments were actually made from a certain species of dog called "raccoon dog."

"First these jackets were falsely advertised as faux fur, and then it turned out that the fur came from a type of dog," said Wayne Pacelle, president and CEO of the Humane Society of the United States.

Pacelle added that the issue is an "industry-wide problem" and its investigation demonstrated that retailers and designers "aren't paying close enough attention to the fur trim they are selling." He added that the issue is especially problematic when "the fur is sourced from China where domestic dogs and cats and raccoon dogs are killed in gruesome ways."

Raccoon dogs — which are not domestic animals — are indigenous to Asia, including eastern Siberia and Japan, and have been raised in large numbers because their fur closely resembles raccoon, Pacelle said.

Orlando Veras, a spokesman at Macy's, a division of Federated Department Stores Inc., confirmed Friday that the retailer had removed the jackets, releasing a statement saying that it has a "long-standing policy against the selling of any dog or cat fur." He continued, "This policy is clearly communicated to all suppliers."

The Sean John jackets — one a snorkel style, the other a classic version — had been labeled "raccoon fur," but were advertised as faux fur, Pacelle said.

In a statement by Sean "Diddy" Combs released by his publicist Hampton Carney, the designer said: "I was completely unaware of the nature of this material, but as soon as we were alerted, the garments were pulled off the Macy's floor and Web site. I have instructed our outerwear licensee to cease the production of any garments using this material immediately."

Macy's removal of the coats comes on the heels of other tests conducted by the Humane Society of the United States on a range of fur-trimmed jackets from retailers such as Burlington Coat Factory, Bloomingdale's, J.C. Penney and Saks Fifth Avenue as well as from designers and clothing lines such as Baby Phat, Andrew Marc, MaxMara and Calvin Klein. Those tests revealed that most of the jackets labeled as "raccoon" or coyote" from China in fact contained fur from raccoon dogs.

Of the 10 garments tested by the Humane Society, nine tested positive as raccoon dog fur and were mislabeled, a violation of federal law.

The Humane Society is also calling upon Congress to amend the Dog and Cat Protection Act — which bans the sale of dog or cat fur in the United States — to include raccoon dog, since the organization says these dogs are so "inhumanely" killed and their species are similar to domesticated dogs.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061222/ap_on_bi_ge/macy_s_dog_fur_1

RICE:Black U.S. President Is Possible






The moderate-conservative Republican, who is America's highest-ranking black government official, has said repeatedly she will not run for president despite high popularity ratings and measurable support for a presidential bid in opinion polls. She said the first successful black candidate will be "judged by all the things that Americans ultimately end up making their decision on: Do I agree with this person? Do I share this person's basic values?


Am I comfortable that this person is going to make decisions when I'm not in the room that are very consequential?" At the same time, she said, "We should not be naive. Race is still an issue in America. When a person walks into a room, race is evident. It's something that I think is going to be with us for a very, very long time.


"Secretary Rice declined to say whether she would like to see her predecessor and partymate, Colin Powell, become a candidate. "I'm not going to give Colin any advice, and he's not going to give me any advice on this one," Secretary Rice said. Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, is currently the most prominent black politician to emerge as a potential candidate for the 2008 presidential race.




Bookers response: It is possible now. However, the issue is whether it is probable now? I say no, and folks need to put down the crack pipe. Hopefully my skepticism will be proven dead wrong in the future. And I could live with a general election matchup between Secretary Condi Rice and Sen. Barack Obama, but that will never happen.


Devone Tucker, a black conservative Republican blogger, asks: "The only question is, will it be a black Democrat or a black Republican who achieves that goal?"

The Case for School Choice

"Defenders of the educational status quo frequently ridicule school choice as both misguided and hopelessly ethereal. They consider the idea of allowing parents and students to choose among schools that compete for their money -- with vouchers aiding the needy -- a dangerous hallucination.

But the universal school choice ... already thrives here. American colleges and universities operate within the very framework school reformers envision. Choice, competition, accountability and quality are routine beyond high school.
" ... Collegiate choice is not exotic. It is the norm. Educational
reformers simply want to replicate this model of variety, competition
and accountability from America's high school quads down to its grammar
school sandboxes.

Somehow this straightforward message gets lost. School choice advocates, with good hearts and sharp minds, sometimes hinder themselves by allowing teachers unionists and their comrades to frame the debate. ...

Education reformers should demand that apologists for today's ghastly system answer one simple question: If school choice works for America's college kids, why is it no good for kindergartners?"



Deroy Murdock is a syndicated columnist for the Scripps Howard News Service and a contributing editor with
National Review Online (nationalreview.com).

The Top 1%...of What?


by Alan Reynolds

As many others have done, Virginia's Democratic Senator-elect Jim Webb recently complained on this page of an "ever-widening divide" in America, claiming "the top 1% now takes in an astounding 16% of national income, up from 8% in 1980" ("Class Struggle" Nov. 15). Those same figures have been repeatedly echoed in all major newspapers, including this one.
Yet the statement is clearly false. The top 1% of households never received anything remotely approaching 16% of personal income (national income includes corporate profits). The top 1% of tax returns accounted for 10.6% of personal income in 2004. But that number too is problematic.

The architects of these estimates, Thomas Piketty of École Normale Supérieure in Paris and Emmanuel Saez of the University of California at Berkeley, did not refer to shares of total income but to shares of income reported on individual income tax returns—a very different thing. They estimate that the top 1% (1.3 million) of taxpayers accounted for 16.1% of reported income in 2004. But they explicitly exclude Social Security and other transfer payments, which make up a large and growing share of total income: 14.7% of personal income in 2004, up from 9.3% in 1980. Besides, not everyone files a tax return, not all income is taxable (e.g., municipal bonds), and not every taxpayer tells the complete truth about his or her income.

For such reasons, personal income in 2004 was $3.3 trillion, or 34.4%, larger than the amount included in the denominator of the Piketty-Saez ratio of top incomes to total incomes. Because that gap has widened from 30.5% in 1988, the increasingly gigantic understatement of total income contributes to an illusory increase in the top 1%'s exaggerated share.

The same problems affect Piketty-Saez estimates of share of the top 5%, which contradict those from the Census Bureau (which also exclude transfer payments). Piketty and Saez figure the top 5%'s share rose to 31% in 2004 from 27% in 1993. Census Bureau estimates, by contrast, show the top 5%'s share of family income fluctuating insignificantly from 20% to 21% since 1993. The top 5%'s share has been virtually flat since 1988, aside from a meaningless one-time jump in 1993 when, as the Economic Policy Institute noted, "a change in survey methodology led to a sharp rise in measured inequality."

Unlike the Census Bureau, Messrs. Piketty and Saez measure income per tax unit rather than per family or household. They maintain that income per tax unit is 28% smaller than income per household, on average. But because there are many more two-earner couples sharing a joint tax return among high-income households, estimating income per tax return exaggerates inequality per worker.

The lower line in the graph shows that the amount of income Messrs. Piketty and Saez attribute to the top 1% accounted for 10.6% of personal income in 2004. That 10.6% figure looks much higher than it was in 1980. Yet most of that increase was, as they explained, "concentrated in two years, 1987 and 1988, just after the Tax Reform Act of 1986." As Mr. Saez added, "It seems clear that the sharp, and unprecedented, increase in incomes from 1986 to 1988 is related to the large decrease in marginal tax rates that happened exactly during those years."

That 1986-88 surge of reported high income was no surprise to economists who study taxes. All leading studies of "taxable income elasticity," including two by Mr. Saez, agree that the amount of income reported by high-income taxpayers is extremely sensitive to the marginal tax rate. When the top tax rate goes way down, the amount reported on tax returns goes way up. Those capable of earning high incomes had more incentive to do so when the top U.S. tax rate dropped to 28% in 1988 from 50% in 1986. They also had less incentive to maximize tax deductions and perks, and more incentive to arrange to be paid in forms taxed as salary rather than as capital gains or corporate profits.

The top line in the graph shows how much of the top 1%'s income came from business profits. In 1981, only 7.8% of the income attributed to the top 1% came from business, because, as Mr. Saez explained, "the standard C-corporation form was more advantageous for high-income individual owners because the top individual tax rate was much higher than the corporate tax rate and taxes on capital gains were relatively low." More businesses began to file under the individual tax when individual tax rates came down in 1983. This trend became a stampede in 1987-1988 when the business share of top percentile income suddenly increased by 10 percentage points. The business share increased again in recent years, accounting for 28.4% of the top 1%'s income in 2004.

As was well-documented years ago by economists Roger Gordon and Joel Slemrod, a great deal of the apparent increase in reported high incomes has been due to "tax shifting." That is, lower individual tax rates induced thousands of businesses to shift from filing under the corporate tax system to filing under the individual tax system, often as limited liability companies or Subchapter S corporations.

IRS economist Kelly Luttrell explained that, "The long-term growth of S-corporation returns was encouraged by four legislative acts: the Tax Reform Act of 1986, the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1990, the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1993, and the Small Business Protection Act of 1996. Filings of S-corporation returns have increased at an annual rate of nearly 9.0% since the enactment of the Tax Reform Act of 1986."

Switching income from corporate tax returns to individual returns did not make the rich any richer. Yet it caused a growing share of business owners' income to be newly recorded as "individual income" in the Piketty-Saez and Congressional Budget Office studies that rely on a sample individual income tax returns. Aside from business income, the top 1%'s share of personal income from 2002 to 2004 was just 7.2%—the same as it was in 1988.

In short, income shifting has exaggerated the growth of top incomes, while excluding a third of personal income (including transfer payments) has exaggerated the top groups' income share.

There are other serious problems with comparing income reported on tax returns before and after the 1986 Tax Reform. When the tax rate on top salaries came down after 1988, for example, corporate executives switched from accepting stock or incentive stock options taxed as capital gains (which are excluded from the basic Piketty-Saez estimates) to nonqualified stock options reported as W-2 salary income (which are included in the Piketty-Saez estimates). This largely explains why the top 1%'s share rises with the stock boom of 1997-2000 then falls with the stock market in 2001-2003.

In recent years, an increasingly huge share of the investment income of middle-income savers is accruing inside 401(k), IRA and 529 college-savings plans and is therefore invisible in tax return data. In the 1970s, by contrast, such investment income was usually taxable, so it appears in the Piketty-Saez estimates for those years. Comparing tax returns between the 1970s and recent years greatly understates the actual gain in middle incomes, and thereby contributes to the exaggeration of top income shares.

In a forthcoming Cato Institute paper I survey a wide range of official and academic statistics, finding no clear trend toward increased inequality after 1988 in the distribution of disposable income, consumption, wages or wealth. The incessantly repeated claim that income inequality has widened dramatically over the past 20 years is founded entirely on these seriously flawed and greatly misunderstood estimates of the top 1%'s alleged share of something-or-other.

The politically correct yet factually incorrect claim that the top 1% earns 16% of personal income appears to fill a psychological rather than logical need. Some economists seem ready and willing to supply whatever is demanded. And there is an endless political demand for those able to fabricate problems for which higher taxes are, of course, the preferred solution. In Washington higher taxes are always the solution; only the problems change.

Alan Reynolds is a senior fellow and author of Income and Wealth (Greenwood Press, 2006).

This article appeared in The Wall Street Journal on December 14, 2006.
http://cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6863&print=Y

Thursday, December 21, 2006

ISLAM....Religion of Peace?




I think someone should make a video like this showing the atrocities of ALL religions and the dangersous potential of all "faith".
Religion when violent can be a burden on man
.




In many ways Noviana Malewa is like any other teen-aged Christian girl in Indonesia. But it is her eyes – which reveal a sadness and strength far beyond her years – that are different, and give evidence of the emotional and mental trauma of her own experience with radical Islam, a new report concludes.

That, and the machete chop scar that runs from her cheek bone across her face down onto her neck, says the report from Voice of the Martyrs.

As WND has reported, Noviana and three of her friends were walking on a school path Oct 29, 2005, when they were assaulted by radical Islamic jihadists wielding machetes. Noviana was the only survivor, and suffered the massive slash across her face and neck; the other three girls were decapitated.

VOMedical, a division of the outreach to persecuted Christians worldwide that deals with medical issues, eventually was able to arrange transportation for Noviana to a hospital in Surabaya, and officials are planning to continue follow-up physical treatment.

"Though Noviana's physical scars are beginning to heal, she still struggles with the emotional and mental scars from witnessing the brutal murder of her three friends. Yet, she remains steadfast in her faith," the group confirmed in its report.


Noviana and her friends had been taking a small footpath on their way to their Christian high school in Poso, Indonesia, when radical Islamists dressed all in black jumped suddenly from the jungle and began slashing the girls with machetes.

VOM reports that Noviana fought back as she was struck, then fell to the ground and rolled down into a ravine. Above, she heard her friends screaming.

Just as she was about to lose hope, a van of soldiers appeared and the attackers fled. The soldiers then took her to a hospital.

But she had to be hidden in a Christian village and guarded by police because her testimony was needed in court, and the radical Muslims who had killed her friends still were hunting her. At that point it was too dangerous even to leave her in a hospital, but after months of negotiations to guarantee her safety, arrangements were made for her to be in the Surabaya hospital, VOM said.

She's had successful surgery and VOM is working on continuing care, officials said. She suffered from an involuntary tick in her eye and another near her mouth because of the nerve damage from the slash, and she also suffered other nerve damage and a dislocated jaw.



Earlier reports said daily massages are being used to stimulate nerve repair and skin salves must be given daily. Plastic surgery also was obtained to reduce the scarring.

Authorities said Theresia Morangke, 15, Yarni Sambue, 15, and Alfita Poliwo, 17, were killed in the attack. Their heads were found in bags on the steps of a church and along a road, carrying a message, "We will murder 100 more Christian teenagers and their heads will be presented as presents."

The Pakistan Christian Post reported that Noviana recalled streaming with blood.

"All I could do was pray to Jesus for his help,' she said.

According to a subsequent report in The Jakarta Post, the Islamic suspects in the deaths have confessed to the fatal attack. Authorities reported that the suspects have ties to Noordin Top, who is considered a key leader of the Al-Qaida-linked group Jamaah Islamiyah.

There also have been reports that the defendants told authorities they planned the murders as a "gift" to mark the end of the Muslim fasting month of Ramadan.

VOM is a non-profit, interdenominational ministry working worldwide to help Christians who are persecuted for their faith, and to educate the world about that persecution. Its headquarters are in Bartlesville, Okla., and it has 30 affiliated international offices.

It was launched by the late Richard and Sabina Wurmbrand, who started smuggling Russian Gospels into Russia in 1947, just months before Richard was abducted and imprisoned in Romania where he was tortured for his refusal to recant Christianity.

He eventually was released in 1964 and the next year he testified about the persecution of Christians before the U.S. Senate's Internal Security Subcommittee, stripping to the waist to show the deep torture wound scars on his body.

The group that later was renamed The Voice of the Martyrs was organized in 1967, when his book, "Tortured for Christ," was released.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53450

Quote Of The Day


"When persons ask me in these days how, in the midst of what sometimes seem hopelessly discouraging conditions, I can have such faith in the future of my race in this country, I remind them of the wilderness through which and out of which, a good Providence has already led us."

Booker T. Washington (1856-1915), conservative Republican educator and free enterprise advocate, in his best-selling autobiography Up From Slavery (1901)

DONALD TRUMP VS. ROSIE



Don't fuck with Trump.

Rosie is just about the most annoying personality on television. It is amazing she ever gets hired to do anything. I mean who says, hmm lets hire the most militant feministic nut case we can find. Thats a horrible business practice. The media is obviously disconnected from the desires of American tv veiwers. If they had payed any attention to her previous bombing ratings they would of thought twice.

African al-Qaida?


African al-Qaida?


MOGADISHU, Somalia - He is nimble on his crutches, moving through the marketplace with a fluid but mechanical choreography of leg and poles.

He didn't see who fired the shot or where it came from, but 18-year-old Noor Malen doesn't believe it was intended for him.It was 1993. He was just a boy, walking the streets near his home. He didn't feel the bullet hit his thigh, but remembers going down, then passing out. The round shattered the bone of his right leg, and doctors amputated it.


"I'm so very angry," he says. "I still have my friends, but nothing else. I can't walk freely, I can't carry things. I probably won't be able to get a job; the only thing I could do is be a watchman."Like so many others here, frustrated by the violence and chaos of Somalia, Noor believes Islam can save him.

"I'd like to run an Islamic school someday," he says. "I think I would be good at it."He also wants to see Somalia become an Islamic state, believing it would bring security and stability -- something he's rarely experienced in his young life.


"Things are so difficult here," he says, shaking his head. "There are 20 people in my family and they can't afford to support me. I only eat one meal a day, breakfast, then nothing but water."


Noor is symbolic, experts say, of what is happening in Somalia today. Fourteen years without a functioning central government and warlords' thugs ruling the streets have turned this land on the horn of Africa into fertile ground for Islamic fundamentalism.


Most of the women around Mogadishu observe strict Islamic dress, some covered head to toe, with only their eyes exposed. It's evidence, some say, of the growing influence of the fundamentalists. Before the beginning of the civil strife in the early '90s, dress was reportedly more relaxed.

Osman Hassan Ali Atto is a powerful warlord in his own right and a minister in the fractious and mostly absentee interim Somali government.


"If the lawlessness continues," Atto says, "yes, people will turn to religion."


And some of those religious organizations they turn to are alleged to have links to terror organizations like al-Qaida.


The largest and most well-funded, according to the terror watchdog International Crisis Group (ICG), is Al-Ittihad al-Islami, or the Islamic Union. It gained support and power after the fall of Somalia's ex-dictator, Siad Barre, in the early '90s.


It attempted to win over Somalis by providing humanitarian relief, schools and even security in some parts of the country, while at the same time spreading fundamentalist ideology. The United States claims that Al-Ittihad al-Islami is linked to al-Qaida through guns, money and training.


There are suspicions it has been involved in assassination attempts on rival Somali political leaders, the November 2002 attack on an Israeli-owned hotel in Kenya that killed 13, and a rocket attack that same day that narrowly missed an Israeli jetliner.

The United States lists Al-Ittihad al-Islami as a foreign terrorist group and has frozen its assets within U.S. jurisdictions.


Sheik Hassan Dahir Aweys is a leader of the group and was once a colonel in the Somali army. Aweys denies any al-Qaida connections, but does say he wants Somalia to become a theocracy.

"The only reason Western powers say that al-Qaida is in Somalia is because they are afraid that Somalia will become an Islamic state and they will do everything they can to stop that," Aweys says. "I believe there's not even one person in Somalia connected to al-Qaida. We are one clan, one color, one language. We would not accept foreigners (al-Qaida) here."

Aweys, with penetrating eyes and a red, henna-tipped beard, is deeply suspicious of Western journalists. I am just the second to interview him within his guarded compound in Mogadishu.

As I a set up my camera and tripod, he asks me if I am an American -- and a Jew. He looks at me askance, as if I were a spy, but consents to the interview anyway.

I ask him about the March 2005 United Nations report that claimed Somalia has become a haven for jihadists and has no fewer than 17 mobile terrorist training camps on its soil.

"The FBI, people like you (journalists) and other groups who are often in the shadows always say al-Qaida is in Somalia," says Aweys, dismissively.

Interim President Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed "also said two years ago there were al-Qaida training camps here. Well, the FBI came here, journalists came here and there were no training camps. It's just not true. We all know each other in Somalia. We would know if al-Qaida was here."

Aweys says he is, however, sympathetic to "jihads" being waged against Western forces around the world.

"If you lock a cat in a room all the time," Aweys says, "what do you think it will do? It's going to fight back."

He says he also supports Somalis who have gone to Iraq to fight against Americans there.

"Islam is one body; if you're wounded in one place, you feel it everywhere. We all feel it when Americans kill Muslims," says Aweys. "I know in my heart I cannot accept when they say we must stay outside. Western countries fight to take what they want from us. We won't accept those conditions."

The U.S. response to the potential terror threat in Africa has been serious. In 2002 it created the Combined Joint Task Force-Horn of Africa (CJTF-HOA), a 2,000-strong outpost based in Djibouti.

And according to the ICG, the task force has put some Somali warlords, ex-military leaders and even Ethiopian security teams on the payroll to capture al-Qaida members operating in Somalia. The ICG says that as many as 12 suspected members are either dead or in jail.

In an interview from Djibouti, CJTF-HOA Spokesman Maj. Ron Watrous denied that the task force is involved in these operations. The mission, he said, is limited to humanitarian activities and to helping regional governments bolster their own security forces. The hope is that this will translate into progress in fighting the war on terror not just in Somalia, but in the entire horn of Africa.

"You don't have to physically go into Somalia to have an impact on Somalia itself," Watrous said.

But some critics say the plan is backfiring. They say Somalis -- already deeply suspicious of American intentions after the failure of Operation Restore Hope in 1993 and the 2003 invasion of Iraq -- feel it's a war being waged on Islam, not terror.It's a problem that the task force acknowledges. "Yes, we are concerned (that the task force is not able to operate in Somalia)," Watrous said. "We do want to be able to communicate more effectively in the region." In a news article in July, the ICG's Horn of Africa Director Mark Bryden said that U.S. support for factional leaders, surveillance flights over Somalia and the abduction of innocent people sometimes held for weeks is "wreaking havoc over the country... the measures may actually be increasing support for terrorism."

Even some of America's closest allies, like Atto, are skeptical about the presence of al-Qaida operatives in Somalia.

"I don't believe [it] and I have not seen any al-Qaida cells in this country," says Atto, "but there are certain elements of so-called extremists that are taking advantage of the situation we are in."


In the Bakhaara Market, where I first met Noor, the young amputee, I see evidence of anger toward Westerners and Americans in particular.

Many shake their fingers and shout at me when I try to videotape them as I walk by -- a product of paranoia, an associate tells me. "They think you're going to show their pictures to the Americans, and they could be snatched up."

One older man, speaking in English, stands up when he sees me in the crowd.

"Tell Bush we're ready," he says. "Tell him we're ready to fight."

"Ready to fight, why?" I ask.

"Because he's attacking Muslims in Iraq; he'll come here too," he says.

Some groups like the ICG are encouraging the West to end the capture campaigns in Somalia and support for factional leaders, which adds to the divisiveness, they say. Instead, the ICG says, the West should focus on supporting the interim government that was formed in Kenya in 2004, but has yet to truly take power.

This backing, they say, will do much more to create stability and keep an Islamic extremist terror threat from becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy.


http://hotzone.yahoo.com/b/hotzone/blogs1015

Wednesday, December 20, 2006

Russell Simmons Challenged On Diamond Fund



Black Enterprise discusses how the hip-hop entrepreneur is using his jewelry company, Simmons Jewelry Co., to empower the citizens of Botswana and South Africa through the diamond industry. But, human rights groups have cast a wary eye on his efforts, saying a focus on countries that have already neutralized trade in conflict diamonds ignores brutal situations in African nations where the diamonds are still traded to finance armed conflict and civil war.

Amnesty International and Global Witness both say that Mr. Simmons’ emphasis on his visits to Botswana and South Africa without mention of nations that have not rid themselves of conflict diamonds whitewashes a serious problem. "We were concerned because he was going to places where blood diamonds were not a significant problem," says Amy O’Meara, a spokeswoman for the Business and Human Rights program at Amnesty International USA, which met with Mr. Simmons before he left.

"If he cared about the repercussions of conflict diamonds, he could go to Liberia and Sierra Leone." Ms. O’Meara said Botswana can be used as a model for how the diamond trade should work, but adds that it is unusual for the majority of African nations.

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8LR0DPG0.htm

http://www.allhiphop.com/hiphopnews/?ID=6500

Walter E. Williams on Racial Profiling

The libertarian economics professor discusses charges of racial, religious, and ethnic profiling in the aftermath of U.S. Airways' removal of six imams from a flight: "It is clear, whether we like it or not, or want to say it or not, that there is a strong correlation between terrorist acts and being a Muslim, and being black and high rates of crime.


That means if one is trying to deter terrorism and in some cases capture a criminal, he would expend greater investigatory resources on Muslims and blacks. A law-abiding Muslim who's given extra airport screening or a black who's stopped by the police is perfectly justified in being angry, but with whom should he be angry?


I think a Muslim should be angry with those who've made terrorism and Muslim synonymous and blacks angry with those who've made blacks and crime synonymous. The latter is my response to the insulting sounds of car doors locking sometimes when I'm crossing a street in downtown Washington, D.C., or when taxi drivers pass me by. It would be a serious misallocation of resources if airport security intensively screened everyone.



After all, intensively screening someone who had a near zero probability of being a terrorist, such as an 80-year-old woman using a walker, would not only be a waste but it would take resources away from screening a person with a much higher probability of being a terrorist."

Quote Of The Day

"More amazingly, Kwanzaa masks itself as an 'African' holiday celebration DESPITE THE FACT that it isn’t celebrated ANYWHERE in the continent of Africa. Unfortunately the general stupidity of African-Americans, coupled with white guilt, allows this bogus 'celebration' to continue in this country unchecked.

From President Bush to Nancy Pelosi, Happy Kwanzaa greetings are constantly echoed as if it is a 'part' of Christmas—WHEN THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS that Kwanzaa has NOTHING to do with Christ!!!

Kwanzaa is anti-Christian and anti-American, and I believe that this is the primary motivation behind ignorant blacks continuing to follow such nonsense.

Despite the fact that ignorant blacks spend countless hours in church every week, they still feel obligated to celebrate this nonsense. Virtually nothing presents a clearer case of blindly following others for NO LOGICAL REASON than their unyielding support of this fake holiday, Kwanzaa."

— B.J. Ellis, black conservative Republican radio host who asserts that Kwanzaa (December 26-January 1) is a racist holiday

Tuesday, December 19, 2006

Pride and Prejudice




By Dinesh D'Souza

Ethnic groups in America have long taken pride in their various heritages. But this process has been taken to new extremes by what is known as Afrocentrism. Radical Afrocentrism asserts all sorts of dubious claims for Africa's past, at the expense of truth and, sometimes, the current needs of African Americans. Worse, contemporary Afrocentrism is often based less on celebration of black achievements than on anger and resentment toward other peoples.

Afrocentrism and other "multicultural" programs repudiate European institutions, including Western scholarly norms, and embrace instead an alternative "black reality." This Afrocentric approach is pervasive in inner-city schools in Atlanta, Milwaukee, Washington, D.C., and elsewhere. It even appears in mixed-race, middle-class suburbs like Prince George's County, Maryland, where a speaker at an Afrocentrism conference told how melanin, the coloring agent in skin, helps blacks "speak and read faster," as well as "glide in the air like a Magic Johnson or hit top speeds like Florence Joyner."

D.C. Schools Superintendent Franklin Smith hired consultant Abena Walker for $250,000 to develop a pilot Afrocentric program for the students in his charge, who rank among the nation's poorest achievers. Walker trains teachers at an unaccredited institution called Pan-African University, which she founded and from which she awarded herself her own master's degree. The outline for her elementary-school education program calls for harnessing the power of Nommo, or African "word magic," because "to control Nommo is to control the generation and transformation of sound, energy, thoughts, and action." Walker acknowledges that her approach does not emphasize traditional academics: "We feel that academics, that's the easy part, because our children are just brilliant." But Russell Adams, chairman of the Afro-American studies department at Howard, the capital's historically black university, disagrees. He has attacked Walker's brand of Afrocentrism, complaining that "neophytes" and "dilettantes" are jeopardizing the education of young people with claims that fail to "sort our historic fact from fiction."

Afrocentrism is not limited to schools: it is increasingly the official ideology of rap musicians, community activists (including the Nation of Islam), and black prisoners. Afrocentric claims routinely make their way into mainstream black literature. In Lerone Bennett's Before the Mayflower: A History of Black America, for instance, Bennett finds "parallels between African philosophy and modern subatomic physics." In Why Black People Tend to Shout, Ralph Wiley credits blacks with inventing the phonograph and the cotton gin, and with pioneering open-heart surgery--claims that are not historically accurate.

Who are the Afrocentrists? Many of them are American black nationalists from the 1960s who have given themselves new names and African accents in order to promulgate what they believe to be a distinctive African worldview. Molefi Asante is probably the leading Afrocentrist in America. Head of the African Studies Department at Temple University, he is also n architect of several school programs designed to transform the traditional curriculum in an Afrocentric direction. "Deify your ancestors," Asante exhorts. He adds that "a total rewrite of the major events and developments in the world is long overdue. Our facts are in our history; use them. Their facts are in their history, and they have certainly used theirs. All truth resides in our own experiences."

As a consequence of this relativized view of truth, Afrocentrsis seems unabashed about teaching young black students information that is judged dubious, even preposterous, by mainstream scholars. Nor are Afrocentrists noticeably chagrined by an absence of professional training in the specialized fields from which their confident claims are drawn. While a few leading Afrocentrists are recognized scholars, many are political activists, ministers in the Nation of Islam, laboratory technicians, musicians, social workers, and self-taught former convicts.

One of the most widely used Afrocentric texts is the African-American Baseline Essays, a teaching manual used in public schools in Portland, Atlanta, Detroit, and elsewhere. The scientific sections of the African-American Baseline Essay were authored by Hunter Adams, who lists himself as a "research scientist at Argonne National Laboratory in Chicago." But according to the information office of Argonne, Adams is in fact a technician whose job is to collect environmental samples. Although identified as "Dr. Hunter Adams" in the baseline essays, Argonne's spokesman reports he has a high school degree only and "does no research at Argonne on any topic."

Afrocentrists openly reject scholarly and scientific techniques as a form of Western "tricknology," and use "legends" and "religious cults" as evidence instead. Accuse Molefi Asante of promulgating myths and he responds, "We act mythically.... All people have a mythology," and black Americans need to "reconstruct our mythology," and black Americans need to "reconstruct" our mythology." A myth "can be considered a form of reasoning and record-keeping by providing an implicit guide for bringing about the fulfillment of the truth it proclaims," argues Wade Nobles. Myths state "truth rather than fact."

To see the sort of truth radical Afro-centrists prefer to mere fact, consider the dramatic claims of Afrocentric scholars on one hand, and mainstream scholars (black and white) on the other.

Afrocentrists argue that early Egypt was a Negroid culture, and that all human civilization thus derives from African culture. Two widely cited sources for this claim are Martin Bernal's Black Athena: The Afroasiatic Roots of Western Civilization, and Chancellor William's The Destruction of Black Civilization. Williams writes that Egypt was "not only all-black, but the very name of Egypt (Kemet) was derived from the blacks."

In fact, African American scholar Frank Snowden says, Kemet has nothing to do with skin color: it refers to the "black land," that is, to the fertile soil watered by the Nile, in contrast to the red land of the desert. Similarly, archaeologist Kathryn Bard says it was conventional in Egyptian art to paint men in a dark-red ochre and women in a light-yellow ochre to distinguish them. This artistic convention is mistaken by Afrocentrists, who use it to claim that Egyptians were Negroid.

Egyptologists have known for a long time that ancient Egypt was a multiracial civilization. Anthropologist Frank Yurco argues that the ancient Egyptians, like their modern descendants, "varied in complexion from the light Mediterranean hue to the darker brown of upper Egypt, to the darker brown of upper Egypt, where, even today, the populations shifts to Nubian." Egypt maintained cultural contacts both to the north and the south, and was a genuinely diverse society in which no importance was attached to race, Yurco adds.

Even before Egypt, Afrocentrists maintain, black Africans produced an extensive literature. "Africans themselves invented writing," insists Williams. Unfortunately, Williams says, virtually all evidence of this literary accomplishment is lost. Ancient African philosophy was likewise advanced, according to Afrocentrists. "It reads like if you're reading Jean-Paul Sartre or Heidegger or Kierkegaard," maintains author Ivan Van Sertima. "It is very complex."

Actually, there is no evidence for early African writing and literature, and Afrocentrists have produced no samples of ancient African theoretical reflection. Indeed Kwasi Wiredu, a leading contemporary African philosopher has no choice but to conduct his philosophical inquiries in relation to the philosophical writings of other peoples, for his own ancestors left him no heritage of philosophical writings.

Afrocentrists claim that in addition to the architectural achievements of ancient Egypt, black Africans built other structures unrivaled in the ancient world. "Africans constructed a national system of reservoirs," remarks Williams, some of them "doubtless at sites not yet excavated." Moreover, they produced "magnificent stone and brick palaces, temples, churches, cathedrals, wide avenues lined with pal, trees, government buildings, public baths, water supply systems. The Arab scholars [who traveled through sub-Saharan Africa] were properly amazed at a way of life so superior to that of their own homeland."

In fact, the medieval Arab travel literature on southern Africa is highly mixed. It contains some respectful observations about the character of the people, but it reports none of the architectural wonders claimed by the Afrocentrists, and includes scornful references to many practices Arab writers found primitive. These references are edited out of Afrocentric literature.

Afrocentrists argue that the ancient Egyptian Negroes produced innumerable inventions and insights that are mistakenly attributed to the modern era. For example, the African-American Baseline Essays claims that black Egyptians developed electricity and built power-driven gliders some 4000 years ago and "used their early planes for travel expeditions and recreations." Yet except for a few references to bird effigies that are mistaken for gliders, Afrocentrists have produced no evidence for these claims. Certainly they are irreconcilable with the technological backwardness of Africa as observed by Chinese, Arabs, and Europeans on a continuous basis since the late Middle Ages.

Afrocentrists claim that the Greeks stole most of their philosophy and medicine from Egypt. Wade Nobles writes in African Psychology that "Aristotle's doctrines of immortality, salvation of the soul, and the summum bonum are examples of the ancient African theory of salvation." Molefi Asante writes, "Of course Plato himself was taught in Africa by Seknoufis and Kounoufis," offering no evidence for the assertion. George James argues in his book Stolen Legacy that "all false praise of the Greeks must be removed from the textbooks of our schools and colleges," and students must undergo a "reeducation consisting of a thorough study of the ideas and arguments contained in my book."

Classical scholars such as Mary Lefkowitz and Frank Snowden have painstakingly investigated these claims and concluded, in Lefkowitz's words, that they are "one part fact, two parts speculation, and three parts outright falsehoods." Contrary to Afrocentric assertions, Lefkowitz maintains, there is no evidence that Socrates and Aristotle went to Egypt or studied there. "The Egyptian Book of the Dead is cited as a source for Aristotle," Lefkowitz says, "but the Book of the Dead is a set of ritual prescriptions about the soul's journey to the next world. It could hardly be further apart from Aristotle's philosophical discussions about human nature." Snowden notes that the Greeks enjoyed amicable relations with blacks but encountered them mainly as mercenaries and soldiers. "The time has come for Afrocentrists to cease mythologizing and falsifying the past," he urges.

Afrocentrists specifically charge that Greek and Roman armies burned down the library of Alexandria in an effort to appropriate African knowledge and prevent Africans from getting credit, but their accounts of the theft conflict. George James maintains that Alexander the Great looted the library in 333 B.C. and "carried off a booty of scientific, philosophic, and religious books." John Jackson, on the other hand, writes that the library was burned almost three centuries later, in 48 B.C., by invading Romans.

It turns out that both of these accounts are wrong. As Frank Snowden points out, "most ancient sources suggest that Ptolemy II founded the library long after Aristotle's death in 322 B.C." There is no evidence Aristotle ever visited Egypt, Snowden adds, and even if the library were built earlier, it is unlikely that it would have contained much of a collection at that early date.

Afrocentrists argue that all other civilizations of the ancient world were either black or owe their achievements to the theft of African ideas. India and China are, in the Afrocentric model, indebted to black ingenuity. "The early inhabitants of India were black," writes John Jackson. "They have Negroid features, dark skin, and wooly hair." Indeed, those who built the Mohenjo Daro and Harappa civilizations in India were not Indians at all, he claims, but "Asiatic Ethiopians." Similarly, the great philosophy and art that emerged in China during the Shang dynasty really derives from black Africans. In They Came Before Columbus, Ivan Van Sertima argues that it was Africans, rather than Columbus, who discovered America. Scrutinizing artifacts of the Olmec civilization of ancient Mexico to find Negro features, Van Sertima argues that Africans using advanced navigational techniques migrated to produce the mathematical and architectural wonders wrongly attributed to the Mayas, Incas, and Aztecs.

No reputable Mesoamerican scholar agrees with these claims, and scholars who are familiar with the archeological evidence say that the Afrocentrists are entirely incompetent in the science of tracing the influence of one society on another. David Grove, an expert on Olmec civilization, says that Afrocentric claims for the black origin of Olmec culture are absurd, and that drawing significance out of the skin tones of Olmec figures is foolish because "the only stone available to them was black stone. The source of the stone is the Tuxtlas mountains, of volcanic origin." The response of experts to books like They Came Before Columbus is typified by the classical scholar whose New York Times review described the work as "ignorant rubbish" by an author whose knowledge of historical techniques is "abysmal."

Even Judaism and Christianity are largely plagiarized from African blacks, according to Afrocentrists, who add that Jesus Christ was a Negro. For example, Cain Hope Felder, editor of African Heritage Study Bible, asserts that Christ was an "Afro-Asiatic Jew" who "probably looked like a typical Yemenite, Trinidadian, or African-American of today."

The Bible makes no reference to Christ's skin color or racial features, but Jon Levenson, a leading biblical scholar, told the Chronicle of Higher Education that "the average Galilean was not black. I don't know of any Jewish groups that were black in the first century." New Testament scholar Robert Funk says that Jesus was probably "swarthy in complexion" like other Semites, but hardly black or Negroid. Asked by the Washington Post about Felder's theory, Funk sputtered, "That's just funny. I suppose we'll be claiming next that he was a woman. Or that he was Native American. The possibilities are unlimited."

Afrocentrists even credit Africans with supernatural powers. The African-American Baseline Essays refers to "the extra-terrestrial origin of the Nile." The document also refers to the paranormal and mystical powers of the pyramids, treats Egyptian astrology as valid science, and credits Egyptian Negroes with expertise "as masters of psi, pre-cognition, psychokinesis, remote viewing, and other undeveloped human capabilities."

Bernard Ortiz De Montellano, an Hispanic anthropologist, argues that these Afrocentric claims are classic instances of "scientific illiteracy" that universities should resist being pressed to teach. "Minorities are already greatly under-represented in science and engineering," Montellano writes. "Teaching them pseudoscience will make it much more difficult for these young people to pursue scientific curricula."

The tragedy of Afrocentrism for blacks is that, in the name of promoting group pride, it provides young people with falsehoods that undercut the accumulation of real knowledge--and the achievement and self-respect that real knowledge brings. Rather than preparing black students for the challenges of living in modern civilization, Anthony Appiah points out, Afrocentrists instead teach them languages that are hardly spoken anywhere and concepts that are "a composite of truth and error, insight and illusion, moral generosity and meanness."

Despite their interest in the ancient world, Afrocentrists appear to have missed one of the most important lessons we can learn from the ancients--the acknowledgement of civilizational differences combined with a refusal to reduce these to biological characteristics. "The Ancient Egyptian lack of color prejudice should serve as a salutary lesson for us today," Frank Yurco says. "They would have considered this Afrocentric argument absurd, and this is something we could really learn from." Instead, Afrocentric argument insists upon projecting their own racial nomenclature and obsession onto the ancients, invoking them to justify contemporary assertions of black militancy.

Afrocentrism is thus both pathetic and formidable. Pathetic because it offers young blacks nothing in the way of knowledge and skills that are required by modern life; formidable, because it offers them racial dynamite instead: a fortified chauvinism, a hardened conspiratorial mindset, and a robotic dedication to ideologies of blackness. The "revolutionary commitment" to which Molefi Asante refers is evident in the hardened gleam in many Afrocentric eyes. Afrocentrists exhibit a virtually cultic pattern of lockstep behavior: everyone everyone dresses alike, and when the leader laughs, everyone laughs. Gradually but unmistakably, Afrocentrists are severing the bonds of empathy and understanding that are the basis for coexistence and cooperation in a multiracial society. Meanwhile, the real needs of blacks--and the hard work of meeting them--are being neglected.

—Dinesh D'Souza is the John M. Olin fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. This essay is adapted from his new book, The End of Racism: Principles for a Multiracial Society, just published by the Free Press.

"Afrocentrism Exposed"


Afrocentrism is a mythology that is racist, reactionary, and essentially therapeutic. It suggests that nothing important has happened in black history since the time of the pharaohs and thus trivializes the history of black Americans. Afrocentrism places an emphasis on Egypt that is, to put it bluntly, absurd.


The "non PC" Story of Kwanzaa



Well ,

Kwanzaa is on it's way and well here's another posting of the KounterKwanzaa Link List.

Kwanzaa Links


We Wish You A Phony Festival - Report (Canadian Magazine)

So This Is Kwanzaa - Newsmax.com

Ann Coulter on Kwanzaa - TownHall.Com

Mona Charen on Kwanzaa - Jewish World Review

Tony Snow on Kwanzaa - Jewish World Review

The TRUE Spirit of Kwanzaa - The New American magazine

The Story of Kwanzaa - The Dartmouth Review

The Truth About Kwanzaa - A Christian Viewpoint

A Momentary Loss of Reason - Binghamton Review

Michael Savage on Kwanzaa - NewsMax

Ron Karenga - Dialog from the Black Radical Congress - December 1999

Happy Kwanzaa - FrontPage Magazine - Link may not work, if it doesn't click here for the Free Republic thread.

I'm Dreaming of a White Kwanzaa - LewRockwell.com - Link may not work, if it doesn't click here for the Free Republic thread.

Letter to Editor - Ypsilanti Courier

What is Kwanzaa? - File Passed Around On Internet About Kwanzaa

Happy Kwanzaa by Patrick S. Poole


The Black Panthers and the Police: A Pattern of Genocide? - NEW YORKER MAGAZINE - February 13, 1971 (Includes great detail of the murders committed by Karenga's thugs)

PBS Interview with black radical Ron Everett (aka Maulana Karenga) - the guy that invented Kwanzaa while in prison for torturing two young women
US, the organization the Ron Everett founded in 1965, the organization that murdered 5 members of the rival Black Panther Party, is back - well it was back in 1995, but they haven't updated their website since then.


Their website is here.



Monday, December 18, 2006

The New Progressive Bible



  • The Organic Garden of Eden
  • Pharaoh Has Two Mummies
  • What Happens in Sodom and Gomorrah Stays in Sodom and Gomorrah
  • Noah Builds Ark to Survive Global Warming
  • Jonah Saves the Whale
  • David Appeases Goliath
  • The Bilingual Writing on the Wall
  • The Tower of Babel & The Controlled Demolition Theory
  • Uncle Samson & The NY Times Reporter Delilah
  • Judas The ACLU Lawyer
  • Joseph & Mary Celebrate Holiday Season By Donating Fetus To Federal Embryonic Stem Cell Bank
  • Government Program Feeds The Multitudes with Five "Whole Grain" Loaves And Two Non-Endangered Fishes

By Propaganda Department

Our latest strategy to lure the religious rubes into the progressive fold of the Democratic Party has resulted in a decisive victory at the polls this November. To solidify this victory and make it irreversible we must reconcile the defunct old Founding Fathers' Bible with the progressive ideas of wealth redistribution and equality of outcome for all. But how can this be achieved if nobody in the progressive community can read the old Bible without dismissing it as an odious collection of outdated tales filled with unpleasant people, unhygienic brawlers, monarchism, and lunatic notions about the existence of God?

The New Modern Library, our affiliate that brought you Tolstoy's War and Peace - What's the Difference?, Ptolemy for Dummies, Dickens' A Tale of Two Glorious Cities: Leningrad & Stalingrad, and Dante's The Divine Limbo, has also brought that old curmudgeon, The Bible, up to date in a new, progressive edition.
MORE >>

http://www.thepeoplescube.com/

20/20 Stupid in America






20-20 investigation by John Stossel entitled "Stupid in America" highlighting some of the flaws with the education system in the United States.

The story started out when identical tests were given to high school students in New Jersey and in Belgium. The Belgian kids cleaned the American kids' clocks. The Belgian kids called the American students "stupid", which gave the piece its name.

Jay Greene, author of "Education Myths," points out that "If money were the solution, the problem would already be solved … We've doubled per pupil spending, adjusting for inflation, over the last 30 years, and yet schools aren't better." ... (more)

The Good Fathers




Many black male filmgoers are overjoyed at "The Pursuit Of Happyness", the latest movie featuring Will Smith that opens today. In the movie, Mr. Smith - who was nominated for a best actor Golden Globe yesterday - isn't a superhero saving the world, but a man totally devoted to his son, an image that many black fathers say is seen too infrequently in U.S. media (hat tip: BlackElectorate.com).

"The Pursuit Of Happyness" is based on the true story of Chris Gardner, a San Francisco homeless man who overcame a plethora of obstacles to find success for himself and his son.The portrayal of black American men in the media has long been the subject of intense discussions: in scholarly journals, among the men themselves, and in the same news that's frequently lambasted for showing American black men mainly in stereotypically negative roles such as criminals and deadbeat dads.

The talk took on new life this year with the release of books such as the Urban Institute's Black Males Left Behind, which cited statistics indicating that many black men, unlike black women, in America were falling below basic education, employment and livable-income levels. And Bill Cosby's 2004 indictment of some black fathers, whom he berated as men who "dropped the sperm cell" and then moved on, still drives much of the discussion on black parenthood.

Such negative representations enrage fatherhood advocates, who note that good black American fathers exist in far larger numbers than poor ones. "The good images are hard to find," said Kofi Asante, director of the Philadelphia Comprehensive Center for Fathers, a resource center. "Most of what we see are shows of brute force with mack daddies or drug dealers. We are scholars, we are musicians, we are teachers....We are in every position that's vital to the American existence, and more of that needs to be shown." Christopher Bracey, an associate professor of law and African and African American Studies at Washington University in St. Louis, says the film appears to have struck a chord, prompting numerous Internet discussions about stereotypes, fatherhood, and black male experiences.Many black fathers are saying that "The Pursuit Of Happyness", with its big star and acknowledgment of hardworking family men, comes at a good time.

When lawyers Stephana I. Colbert and Valerie I. Harrison of Philadelphia solicited submissions for their book Color Him Father: Stories of Love and Rediscovery of Black Men, they were inundated with positive stories. "The hard part was in paring them down to 35," Colbert said of the book published in May. "All of us took away positive experiences from our fathers. The important piece was we didn't believe this was the exception." A similar idea was behind the June launch of Proud Poppa, a North Plainfield, N.J.-based magazine with a mission to "celebrate, elevate and replicate fatherhood success principles in the black community
."

Face Of A New NAACP Way






Mr. Stokes has already asserted his leadership, most recently pushing the Museum of Science and Industry to shelve a controversial pirate exhibit that included relics from a slave ship destined to dig up old wounds among blacks."They fought for us to get this knowledge," Mr. Stokes said of older leaders, "but once you get involved, it's almost like you're shunned. 'You're not black enough' or 'You're too smart for your own good.'


" He looks at the roster of local, white elected officials and ticks off several in their 30s or 40s and contrasts that with elected black leaders, who are largely much older. "They have failed to groom the next generation of leaders," he said. Some older leaders feel young people are too selfish and materialistic, and don't respect the struggle for the common good of the '60s and '70s. Younger people complain that black institutions such as the NAACP are outdated and unwilling to change their methods. This isn't the 1960s, Mr. Stokes said, when the NAACP was the only organization young black professionals could join.


"They need to know we're not going to waste their time," he said.Some wonder why Mr. Stokes - now Fifth Third Bank's community affairs manager - would work for a divisive organization like the NAACP when he could just quietly climb the corporate ladder and make money. He said he feels obligated to lead.


While he wishes the NAACP could go out of business, it can't as long as inequity exists. And it lives in the boardrooms these days, he said, making his business experience and political connections exactly what the organization needs. School boards need to close achievement gaps. Government boards need to award more minority contracts, he said.His party affiliation gives him the ear of U.S. Sen. Mel Martinez and governor-elect Charlie Crist, but it gives some blacks pause. Mr. Stokes calls the Democratic Party a "modern-day slave plantation," which makes blacks think they can't do anything on their own. He thinks too many black people blame others for their problems when they should pull themselves up by their "bootstraps" - as did his mother.


"We're not victims," he said. "Anyone born after 1965, you can't cry that racism crap." He said blacks should support more than one party, and he looks up to Rep. Harold Ford Jr., Massachusetts governor-elect Deval Patrick, both Democrats, and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, both Republicans. He wants more minorities in leadership positions so young black children like his son have people to look up to, regardless of party.

Powell Casts Doubt On Troop Increase



Former Secretary of State Colin Powell is casting doubt on a plan under consideration by President Bush that would increase troops in Iraq, calling the U.S. Army overextended and "about broken." The moderate Republican, who was the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman for the President George H.W. Bush during the 1991 Gulf War, said if more troops were proposed, commanders would have to make their mission clear, determine whether they can accomplish it and what size force is appropriate. "I am not persuaded that another surge of troops into Baghdad for the purposes of suppressing this communitarian violence, this civil war, will work," said Mr. Powell, who was secretary of state under President George W. Bush from 2001 to 2005. "We have to be very, very careful in this instance not just to grab a number out of the air."

At the White House, spokesman Tony Snow downplayed any disagreements between Mr. Powell and president. Mr. Snow characterized Mr. Powell's comments as practical and thoughtful, but added that "all of these considerations and concerns have been raised before."

On Sunday, Iraq's Sunni vice president called for more American soldiers in Baghdad to quell sectarian violence - even though the Shiite-dominated government has proposed shifting U.S. troops to the capital's periphery and having Iraqis assume primary responsibility for security in the city. "Who is going to replace the American troops?" asked Tariq al-Hashemi, who met with Bush in Washington last week. "Iraqi troops, across the board, they are insufficient, incompetent, and many of them corrupted."

Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nevada), the incoming U.S. Senate majority leader, offered qualified support for a troop surge, saying it would be acceptable for a few months as part of a broader strategy to bring combat forces home by 2008. "If the commanders on the ground said this is just for a short period of time, we'll go along with that," said Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., citing a time frame such as two months to three months. But a period of 18 months to 24 months would be too long, he said.


http://bookerrising.blogspot.com/

Black Pathologies And Unemployment



By Chance, Chancellorfiles


Chance: The employment rate for many young black men is very low, many American employers prefer to hirer immigrants, Mexicans, and other Hispanics over black males when it comes to low paying jobs. Many low paying jobs are semi skilled typed jobs that pay above minimum wage — but not enough to lift the employee up to the level of middle class. Minimum wage jobs are also low paying jobs; you can not make a decent living working a minimum wage job. Immigrants, Mexicans, and other Hispanics are often preferred over blacks when it comes to employment at minimum wage jobs, and not because of coincidence either - there are many reasons why employers prefer immigrants over blacks. Some of the reasons are because immigrants work for lower wagers, lingering racism, employers not wanting to give benefits, black pathologies, etc the reality is, that many employers view black males in a negative way.

Researchers from the University of Chicago interviewed many Chicago employers, and asked them why many employers refuse to hire Black males. Many of the Chicago employers described blacks as unskilled, uneducated, illiterate, dishonest, unmotivated, involved in gangs and drugs, poor role models, etc….


The agreement among these employers was that blacks brought their negative pathological behavioral patterns to the work place, and were to avoided at all cost. Also the researchers interviewed black business owners, and black business owners also shared the same opinions as the other employers. Unfortunately it is true, that certain black men are difficult to work with - and they do bring their pathologies to the work place.
All across America researchers from universities and intellectual institutions have done research and interviewed employers, and asked them why they (employers) will not hire black males. The answers have always been in general the same and that is, black males bring behavioral problems to work. Researchers have interviewed employers in Los Angels, New York, Chicago, and many other big cities across America and asked these employers why black males are not hired in large numbers by employers. The employers in these cities basically gave the same reasons as the employers in Chicago.


The Reasons Why Blacks Are Not Hired:

1. Uncooperative
2. Bad attitude
3. Unmotivated
4. Lack initiative
5. Rude
6. Negative
7. Lazy
8. Lower Family Values
9. Lingering racism (racial discrimination)
10. Illiterate
11. Uneducated
12. Dishonesty
13. Psychologically unstable due to being identified with negative thoughts and feelings
14. Poor role models
15. Unskilled
16. Involved in Drugs and gangs
17. No Charm
18. Short temper
19. Uncompassionate
20. Unsympathetic
21. Sexually harassing co-workers
22. Intimidating Co-workers
23. Low Morality level

Chance: As I have shown, it’s not just because immigrants are taking lower paying jobs that’s creating higher unemployment among blacks. But it also has to do with the black pathologies that many young black males display. And unfortunately, the black men who do not display these pathological behavioral patterns have too suffer along with the black males Who do display these unpleasant behavioral patterns.

Even many older black men, who are in their 40s and 50s, display these negative behavioral patterns. All of these negative behavioral patterns that blacks display in public are called black pathologies. It’s sad that many intelligent young black men who do not show these pathologies have too suffer not being hired by employers. Because the black males who show these negative characteristics make the black race look unpleasant. So immigrants and racism are not the only reasons why black males are not being hired in large numbers by employers. Pathological behavior is the missing link that explains why - many young black men are not hired by employers.

By Chance Kelsey (Chancellor) Written during the 21st century

Setting Themselves Apart





American Enterprise Institute - by Resident Fellow Ayaan Hirsi Ali


British Prime Minister Tony Blair says the Muslim veil is a mark of separation, which makes the integration of Muslim women into society more difficult. He's right. Those who wear the veil deliberately set themselves apart.

Many are coerced into shrouding their bodies. The veil is the visible symptom of their more comprehensive subjection. They are required to be obedient, to ask permission of their male guardians when they leave the house, often with a chaperone. These victims of force, whether they live in England or in Saudi Arabia, almost always have very limited education. They are married young, through arranged or forced marriages, and are groomed for docility. They do not appear in unemployment statistics, or any statistics at all. As ordained by their faith, they are invisible.

Those women who voluntarily choose the veil are different. Often they are literate, verbally forthright and independent. Many are recent converts--"born again" Muslims and Islamic activists who may be well integrated into society. Yet they have made a clear choice. They reject the Western lifestyle. The veil is an expression of the moral philosophy they hold and wish to impose upon others. They seek to provoke, to intimidate. In many European cities it is increasingly common to see girls, sometimes as young as 5, with headscarves tied tightly around their necks, or even little veils. They are taught to keep away from boys, from unbelievers and from Muslims who are weak in the faith--in other words, other unveiled Muslim little girls. That is precisely the purpose of the veil.

The veil also manifests division of the sexes. Women must veil; men do not. Underlying this simple dogma is a sexual morality that holds women responsible for the sexual conduct of men. Men may become aroused to sinful thoughts at the sight of a woman. For that, the unveiled woman will be punished in hell by Allah. Australia's most senior Muslim cleric, Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali, recently spoke about a group of Muslim men jailed for many years for gang rapes: "If you take uncovered meat and place it outside on the street...and the cats come and eat it...whose fault is it--the cats' or the uncovered meat? The uncovered meat is the problem." He went on: "If she was in her room, in her home, in her hijab, no problem would have occurred."

The most wicked aspect of this "morality" is the complete lack of male responsibility for male conduct. And this sexual morality clashes deeply with that of the West, which emphasizes female eroticism in fashion, music, films, advertising. Feminists may argue the merits of all this, but one distinction remains important. In the West, there exists an assumption that men are capable of sexual restraint. It is this presumption that makes it possible for us women to freely take part in public life and make our own private choices. The victim of rape in a miniskirt did not ask for it, and the husband who rapes his wife is guilty of a felony.

And what of the debate over the separation of church and state, as waged in France? No single religion may dominate the public space. Everyone may freely exercise their religion--a right not enjoyed in Saudi Arabia, Iran or Pakistan--but they may not seek to impose it on others. They may not wear "ostentatiously visible" insignia of religion in schools.

Muslim women who veil in Western societies violate all these norms. They are being immodest and invasive. They will succeed only in creating hostility. To every woman who decides to walk out the door looking like Batman and then complains of being ridiculed, I say, you are inviting it. Bear it or shed it.

Friday, December 15, 2006

A Hat Tip to http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/


A known British Mullah Mr. Anjum Chaudri describes the "Killing of Innocent" Non-Muslims civilians in the suicide bombing as "Legitimate". ... (more)



ABOUT BLACK AMERICANS - DEMOGRAPHICS

U.S. Census Bureau

8.8 million families: 52% single parent (43% single women, 9% single men), 48% married. 9% of black kids live with grandparents (1940: 77% married, 18% single women, 5% single men)

Just the facts

Quote Of The Day

"As I thought should have been obvious, I don't think that the observation, or analysis, or discussion of racial differences is racist. The black-white achievement gap is real. The issue is what inferences are drawn from those observations of difference. There is enough uncertainty over what is meant by race, and enough uncertainty over what is meant by intelligence, and enough uncertainty over our ability to measure what we think is intelligence, and enough uncertainty over the science of measurement itself that--I think--it's perfectly fair to question the motives of those who want to jump to the conclusion that the key variable in explaining this enormously complicated question is the shade of someone's skin. Honestly. I thought we settled this issue in the 19th century."



Malcolm Gladwell, author of Blink and The Tipping Point, in challenging the views of white racialist Steve Sailer

Racism in Sudan..Is the Koran at Fault?



Racism has had equal time in all cultures. It's a universal human phenomenon. However, a fair amount of the world has now acknowledged it for what it truly is--despicable. It's still tacitly accepted in the Arab world, though.

Slavery was legal in Saudi Arabia and Yemen as late as 1962. The notion that Arabs are supreme is based on, as far as I can see, two primary sources.

First, the Qur'an is said to have been given to Muhammad, rendered in "perfect Arabic" (but it's not). Second, Arab Muslims swept over the Middle East, North Africa, and parts of the northern Mediterranean and the Indian subcontinent, virtually unimpeded in a remarkable series of victories. And even now, racism is still an important dynamic factor in the Arab culture of hubris, entitlement, and putative superiority. This is displayed prominently in Sudan.

With the Arab government in the Sudan and its cronies in the UN, the ongoing human rights disaster involving the savage treatment by Arab Janjaweed gangs of thugs of the indigenous black (predominantly Muslim) Sudanese population is only now drawing condemnation from the world. And still, after all this time, after so much preventable death and destruction, we're still at the "you'd better watch out or we might start thinking about drafting paperwork to prepare to enact a resolution which may result in sanctions" stage of confronting the Arab regime in the Sudan.

And in the meantime, "Palestinian" Arabs play the lachrymose role of the aggrieved and oppressed people in the charade of their invented victimhood.

...................................Muhammad's Own Words..........................................................


Prophet of Doom was written to expose what Islam’s founder had to say about himself, his ambition, religion, and god.

Before you use or criticize these quotes, please read this overview from the author. For those who are serious about the study of Islam, be sure to read the source material appendix, entitled Islam's Dark Past.


Ishaq:243

"I heard the Apostle say: ‘Whoever wants to see Satan should look at Nabtal!' He was a black man with long flowing hair, inflamed eyes, and dark ruddy cheeks…. Allah sent down concerning him: ‘To those who annoy the Prophet there is a painful doom." [9:61] "Gabriel came to Muhammad and said, ‘If a black man comes to you his heart is more gross than a donkey's.'"

Ishaq:144

"A rock was put on a slave's chest. When Abu Bakr complained, they said, ‘You are the one who corrupted him, so save him from his plight.' I will do so,' said Bakr. ‘I have a black slave, tougher and stronger than Bilal, who is a heathen. I will exchange him. The transaction was carried out."

Qur'an 9:97

"The Arabs of the desert are the worst in unbelief and hypocrisy, and most fitted to be in ignorance of the command which Allah hath sent down to His Messenger."

Tabari II:11

"Shem, the son of Noah was the father of the Arabs, the Persians, and the Greeks; Ham was the father of the Black Africans; and Japheth was the father of the Turks and of Gog and Magog who were cousins of the Turks. Noah prayed that the prophets and apostles would be descended from Shem and kings would be from Japheth. He prayed that the African's color would change so that their descendants would be slaves to the Arabs and Turks."

Tabari II:21

"Ham [Africans] begat all those who are black and curly-haired, while Japheth [Turks] begat all those who are full-faced with small eyes, and Shem [Arabs] begat everyone who is handsome of face with beautiful hair. Noah prayed that the hair of Ham's descendants would not grow beyond their ears, and that whenever his descendants met Shem's, the latter would enslave them."

Tabari IX:69

"Arabs are the most noble people in lineage, the most prominent, and the best in deeds. We were the first to respond to the call of the Prophet. We are Allah's helpers and the viziers of His Messenger. We fight people until they believe in Allah. He who believes in Allah and His Messenger has protected his life and possessions from us. As for one who disbelieves, we will fight him forever in Allah's Cause. Killing him is a small matter to us."

Bukhari: V9B89N256

"Allah's Apostle said, ‘You should listen to and obey your ruler even if he is a black African slave whose head looks like a raisin.'"

Ishaq:450

"It is your folly to fight the Apostle, for Allah's army is bound to disgrace you. We brought them to the pit. Hell was their meeting place. We collected them there, black slaves, men of no descent.

Ishaq:374

"The black troops and slaves of the Meccans cried out and the Muslims replied, ‘Allah destroy your sight, you impious rascals.'"

Bukhari:V4B52N137

"The Prophet said, ‘Let the negro slave of Dinar perish. And if he is pierced with a thorn, let him not find anyone to take it out for him.... If he [the black slave] asks for anything it shall not be granted, and if he needs intercession [to get into paradise], his intercession will be denied.'"

http://www.prophetofdoom.net/Islamic_Quotes_Racism.Islam

http://clarityandresolve.com/archives/2004/09/yes_it_is_a_gen.php

Work and Marriage: The Way to End Poverty and Welfare





Many advocates for the poor believe that the solution to poverty involves giving people more money. After all, if poverty is defined as having an income below some socially acceptable level, then the easiest and most direct way of raising poor people above that level is to boost their incomes. Such assistance is usually called welfare, although it may include, in addition to cash assistance, noncash benefits such as food stamps and housing subsidies.

Providing such assistance has been the dominant strategy for combating poverty in the United States for many years. Yet it has been remarkably unsuccessful. There is no state where a welfare check will raise a four-person family above the government's official poverty line ($18,104 in 2001). Add in the fact that the official poverty line is a pretty stingy standard that has not kept pace with rising standards of living over the past half century and these data become even more disheartening.

In this brief, we contrast making cash and related forms of public assistance more generous with strategies that encourage work and marriage. The data suggest that the latter are more effective ways of reducing poverty and demonstrate the wisdom of the increasing attention that has been given to encouraging work and marriage in recent policy discussions.



Poor Work and Marry Less than the Nonpoor


Most people are poor in the United States because they either do not work or work too few hours to move themselves and their children out of poverty. More specifically, the heads of poor families with children worked only one half as many hours, on average, as the heads of nonpoor families with children in 2001, according to the Census Bureau (table 1).


There are many reasons the poor work fewer hours than the nonpoor, including difficulty in finding jobs, the demands of caring for young children, poor health, transportation problems, substance abuse, and other personal problems. Although a shortage of job opportunities is often cited as an important reason for the poor's lack of involvement in the work force, the gap in the work hours of poor and nonpoor families with children is observed in good years as well as bad. The state of the economy and the availability of jobs surely play some role, but are not the primary reasons for these differences in work effort. In short, the poor have less income in large measure because they work far fewer hours than their more affluent counterparts.


Another striking difference between the poor and nonpoor is the much smaller proportion of the poor who are married. In 2001, 81 percent of nonpoor families with children were headed by married couples. This compares to only 40 percent among poor families with children (table 1). In part this reflects higher marriage rates among the better educated or more skilled and in part it reflects the fact that such families increasingly have two earners, lifting them out of poverty whatever the size of their individual paychecks.


Still a third difference between the poor and the nonpoor is in levels of education. The average head of a poor family with children is a high school dropout, while the average head of a nonpoor family has completed some college (table 1). While lack of education is commonly cited as a prime source of poverty, it as we will see is less important than work and marriage in depressing family incomes.


Finally, poor families have more children than the nonpoor, requiring that their limited incomes support more people. Among families with children, the typical poor family has slightly more than two children whereas the typical nonpoor family has less than two (table 1). While this difference is small, it not only requires that available income be stretched a little further, but more importantly could inhibit work and marriage among single parents.

Reducing Poverty by Changing Behavior


The poverty rate for families with children was 13 percent in 2001. Using Census data and some simple modeling, we can simulate what would happen to the poverty rate under different assumptions about work, marriage, education, and family size among the poor. One can think of these as a series of tests to see which changes in behavior have the biggest effects in reducing the incidence of poverty.


The first simulation assumes that all non-elderly and non-disabled family heads work at least full-time. They receive the same hourly wage they currently earn-or could earn based on their education and other characteristics. This test shows that full-time work would reduce the poverty rate more than 5 percentage points from 13 to 7.5 percent (figure 1). Thus, full-time work eliminates almost half of the poverty experienced by families with children. (If work-related expenses were subtracted from income, the effects would be somewhat less dramatic. For more details, see A Hand Up for the Bottom Third: Toward a New Agenda for Low-Income Working Families, by Isabel Sawhill and Adam Thomas, Brookings, 2001).


A second simulation assumes that the same proportion of children live in female-headed families in 2001 as in 1970—before divorce and out-of-wedlock childbearing dramatically increased the proportion of children living with a single parent. The idea behind this test is to ask what would happen if as many people married and stayed married now as then. The test simulates marriages between single mothers and unmarried men who are similar in age, education, and race. These virtual marriages take place between real people who report their status to the Census Bureau. Thus, if there is a shortage of men, or if they have limited or no earnings, these conditions are reflected in the results. Once married, we combine the incomes of the two households. (The details of this simulation are described in "For Richer or for Poorer: Marriage as an Antipoverty Strategy," by Adam Thomas and Isabel Sawhill, in the September 2002 issue of the Journal of Policy Analysis and Management).


The marriage simulation reduces the poverty rate among families with children by 3.5 percentage points, from 13 to 9.5 percent (figure 1). With a few exceptions, we find no shortage of unmarried men for these women to marry. The major exception is within the African-American population where there is a shortage of potential mates in some age and education categories. This shortage may be the result of the large number of young minority men who are incarcerated or dead or it may reflect the difficulty the Census Bureau has in finding and interviewing minority men in lower-income communities.


The third simulation assumes that every family head has at least a high school education and earns at least as much as high school graduates normally receive. Although not as big a poverty-reducer as full-time work or marriage, this test lowers the poverty rate among families with children by nearly two percentage points, from 13 to 11.1 (figure 1).


The fourth test estimates how much less poverty there would be if families had no more than two children. With the same income but fewer mouths to feed, they are better off. This simulation reduces the poverty rate among families with children by only 1.7 percentage points, from 13 to 11.3 percent, not as much as the other three simulations (figure 1).


Finally, we conduct a combined simulation implementing each of the four individual tests sequentially. The full-time work test is conducted first, then the high school education test, followed by the marriage test, and finally the test that assumes families have no more than two children. After each test, each family's poverty status is reevaluated and only those families that are still poor are eligible to participate in the next test. The combined effect of these four tests is a 9.3 percentage-point drop in the poverty rate among families with children, from 13 percent to 3.7 percent. Thus, the poverty rate among families with children could be lowered by 71 percent if the poor completed high school, worked full-time, married, and had no more than two children.


What about Welfare?


For many years, liberals have advocated increasing welfare benefits as the best way to reduce poverty, especially among single parents. Many liberals remain concerned that the welfare law of 1996, by requiring work and encouraging marriage while time-limiting benefits, would have adverse consequences for the poor.


But just how helpful are welfare benefits compared to work and marriage in lifting people out of poverty? To answer this question, we conducted a simulation to determine the effect on poverty of doubling the amount of welfare benefits received by potentially eligible families. Because welfare benefits are underreported to the Census Bureau, we first corrected for this underreporting, and then simply doubled the (corrected) amounts received by each family.


The result is revealing. Even a doubling of current benefit levels does less to reduce poverty than any of the simulations of behavioral changes reported above. We have to triple welfare benefits before they reduce poverty as much as any of the behavioral changes. Work, marriage, education, and family size are all more powerful determinants of the incidence of poverty than the amount of cash assistance received from the government. This conclusion is reinforced to the extent one believes that increasing cash benefits would undermine incentives to work, marry, complete one's education, and limit the size of one's family. None of these indirect effects of increased welfare is incorporated in these estimates.


Perhaps making all benefits—not just welfare—conditional on work could further reduce poverty. Research has shown that such conditionality increases employment. For example, since the mid-1980s, employment rates among single mothers have risen dramatically in part because of the increasingly generous wage supplements provided by the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), the increasing availability of child care subsidies, and the very substantial increases in health care coverage for families leaving welfare.

The Special Case of Single-Parent Families


Poverty is concentrated among single-parent families. For families with children, 32 percent are poor if the family is headed by a single parent but only 7 percent are poor if the family is headed by two married parents. Full-time work would more than halve the very high poverty rate among single-parent families. However, advocating work, and especially full-time work, among single parents is controversial. Indeed, current proposals from the Bush administration and House Republicans to require forty hours of work or other work-related activities each week from welfare mothers have been sharply criticized, not least by Republicans in the Senate.
This criticism may be justified if the focus is today's single mothers and their children. Juggling work and family responsibilities is hard for any family and especially for those with limited income and education. And it is doubly difficult if child care is not available or affordable. At the same time, there is good evidence that the children in these families are likely to do better if placed in high-quality child care or early education than if left at home until the time they enter school. Thus, the opportunity exists to reduce both current poverty rates and improve children's development by a two-generation policy of requiring work and placing children in high-quality care.


A Vision for the Future


Looking beyond the circumstances of today's single mothers and focusing instead on a vision for the future leads us to suggest a comprehensive, behavior-based strategy for reducing poverty. The strategy is based on a set of normative expectations for the youngest generation. They would be expected to stay in school at least through high school, delay childbearing until marriage, work full-time to support any children they chose to bear outside marriage, and limit the size of their families to what they could afford to support. Existing policies would be aligned with this set of expectations. Income assistance would be conditional on work with some exceptions for hardship cases, including serious disability. Benefit programs (including tax credits and exemptions) would be capped at two children per family. This policy would not deny people the right to have more children, but it would require that they do so at their own expense. Marriage and work disincentives in existing benefit programs would be reduced wherever possible, not just by extending benefits up the income scale but also by making marriage and work a condition for receiving more types of assistance.


At the same time, some other benefits would be made more generous. Sawhill would guarantee good-quality child care to all low-income parents and add up to six months of paid leave for parents with infants or young children. Such leave would be conditional on having a substantial work history, would be available to all families, and would be subsidized on a sliding scale basis. Haskins does not support increases in family leave, but supports increased spending on child care, especially for poor children.


Paid leave would be combined with a more generous set of supports for low-income working families (including not only child care but also health insurance and the EITC). Unemployment insurance and community service jobs would be available for those unable to find work in the private sector, but only for a limited time, and only at minimum wage. Welfare as we know it would wither away. It would not be needed. After some future date it would simply not be available. The savings from eliminating welfare would be reinvested in some or all of the above programs. An initial demonstration of this system in one state, under waivers from the federal government, could be used to test this new approach and would help to establish its feasibility, net costs, and antipoverty effectiveness. In fact, the system that has been operating in Wisconsin for many years is already close to the model program we have in mind. However, many of its effects would not be clear until it had been in operation long enough, and on a large enough scale, to affect the attitudes and behaviors of the youngest generation.

Would It Work?


Public opinion polls suggest that such a system would be far more popular than existing programs. Ending welfare resonated with the voters when Bill Clinton first proposed it in his 1992 presidential campaign and when sweeping reforms based on work and personal responsibility were enacted on a bipartisan basis in 1996. Polls have consistently shown that the public is much more willing to support those who work than those who don't.
The data reviewed above suggest that work is a powerful antidote to poverty. Moreover, the expectation of work has implications for education, marriage, and family size. Young people who know that they are going to have to work would be more likely to finish school. Those who aspire to be stay-at-home mothers for an extended period would be more likely to delay having children until they are married since the government would no longer subsidize them to be full-time mothers. And those required to work would have less time to care for additional children and might plan their families accordingly. Indeed, serious work requirements may be more of an incentive to finish school, delay childbearing until marriage, and limit the size of one's family than all the combined government programs directly aimed at these objectives.


In addition to the data and arguments about the strong antipoverty effectiveness of work reviewed above, a number of demonstration programs point in a similar direction. For example, the Canadian Self-Sufficiency Project (SSP) requires that in order to qualify for generous wage supplements, former welfare recipients must work at least thirty hours a week. Studies suggest that it has been one of the most cost-effective antipoverty policies ever implemented because every dollar of government assistance produces several additional dollars of earnings within the target population as a result of the strong work requirements embedded in the program. Thus, the program has dramatically increased employment and incomes among recipients, reduced welfare dependency and poverty, and done all of this while imposing modest additional costs on government.


Contrast this to the current system in the United States, where disincentives to work are large. As incomes rise, various forms of assistance are scaled back and payroll and other taxes begin to take a larger bite out of people's earnings. For example, a couple each earning 1.5 times the minimum wage gets to keep less than 20 cents of each additional dollar they earn, according to a study from the National Center for Policy Analysis. If this couple moves from working part-time to full-time, they do not gain at all. Every dollar of additional earnings is offset by higher taxes and lower benefits. One way to reduce these disincentives is to make existing assistance conditional on work, including full-time work, and to eliminate anything other than temporary assistance for those who do not work at all.

Conclusion


Advocates for the poor have too long argued that welfare was the solution to poverty. Yet most evidence points in a different direction. The reform of welfare in 1996 has had far more positive effects on employment, earnings, and poverty rates than almost anyone anticipated. The data summarized in this brief suggest this is because work is a powerful antidote to poverty and that, in its absence, no politically feasible amount of welfare can fill the gap as effectively.


The short-term implication of this finding is that fiscally strapped states need help if they are to continue to fund programs that move welfare recipients into the work force and keep them there in a softer economy. The longer-term implication is that steps should be taken to move the entire system of benefits targeted to lower-income Americans more toward encouraging work and marriage and less toward providing unconditional assistance to those who do not work and who bear children outside of marriage. Because work-related benefits are more politically popular than those not tied to work, the system would not only be more effective per dollar spent, but it might well enjoy the political support that would make it more generous than the one it replaced.




Ron Haskins is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and co-director of the Welfare Reform & Beyond initiative. In 2002, he was Senior Advisor to the President for Welfare Policy at the White House.


Isabel V. Sawhill is vice president and director of the Economic Studies Program at the Brookings Institution and co-director of the Welfare Reform & Beyond initiative.


The Converts...Islams new members


Richard Ried



Jose Padila


Steven Smyrek

I found this interesting site which has begun to list "converts" to Islam who have turned well, you know the drill by now violent.Given that so many black young man convert to Islam, I wonder if the rage that made them seek the faith is helped any. Not all Muslims are terrioist or even violent but maybe the immans should have a better routing process for its new converts. So many converts of Islam fall into the extreme elemnts of the faith, and before you know it they making trips to strange sounding lands.

It could be that they are converting because they think Islam is manly and violent and as away to maintain a tough stance convert. The prisons are a perfect example of this as where there Islam can be a protective community. Black men who do not want to be raped, may be willing to pretend to be Muslim so as to get hurt and in the process convert. Any way this is a list composed by a german blogger, whose site is in german. According to him the list and the stories about those converts will be updated regularly. He is asking that anyone of has some new cases, to please add them.


Also to find out about each person type in the name and simply go to google or wikipedia
for futher research.

http://islam-deutschland.info/forum/viewtopic.php?t=52&start=0

1. José Padilla
2. Richard Reid
3. Steven Smyrek
4. Christian Ganczarski
5. Achmed Huber
6. Lionel Dumont
7. Jermaine Lindsay
8. Joseph Terrence Thomas alias "Jihad Jack"
9. Anthony Garcia alias Rahman Adam
10. Lennox Phillips --> heutzutage Yasin Abu Bakr
11. David Millard alias Mustapha Abdullah Muhammad
12. Brent Miller
13. Muriel Degauque
14. Johan(Schweden)
15. Levar H. Washington
16. Gregory V. Patterson
17. Andrew Rowe
18. Thomas Fischer
19. Louis Eugene Walcott alias Louis Farrakhan
20. James Harris alias Zaid Mu'min
21. Donald Eugene Cunningham
22. Joseph H. Stevens alias Yusuf Bey
23. Sergei Malyshev alias Amin al-Ansari
24. Jason Walters
25. Richard Dean Belmar
26. Louis Haneef
27. Martin Mubanga
28. Florian Lesch
29. David Hicks
30. Shane Kent
31. Nasreal Batiste
32. Willie Virgile Brigitte
33. Jérome Courtailler
34. Johann Bonté
35. Jean-Marc Grandvisir
36. Adam Gadahn
37. Bob Blitzer
38. John Walker Lindh
39. Earnest James Ujaama
40. Jeffrey Leon Battle
41. Patrice Lumumba Ford
42. October Lewis
43. Aukai Collins
44. Hiram Torres
45. Cleven Raphael Holt
46. Jibreel al-Amreekee
47. Sonja B.(Berlin)
48. Jack Roche
49. Pierre Richard Robert
50. Ruddy Teranova
51. Domenico Quaranta
52. Rashid Baz
53. John Samuel
54. Kerim Chatty
55. Marcus Archer
56. Aukai Collins
57. Ilich Ramírez Sánchez
58. Sergey Dimitriyev
59. Ahmed Santos
60. David Belfield
61. Jill Courtney
62. Pierre Robert
63. Vladimir Khodov
64. Trevor William Forest alias Abdullah al-Faisal
65. Don Stewart-Whyte
66. Attila Ahmet
67. Abu Bakar Heikkila
68. Donald Stewart White
69. Redendo Kain Dellosa
70. Feliciano de los Reyes aka Ustadz Abubakar
71. Wally Villanueva
72. Pio de Vera
73. Dhiren Barot
74. Rouven D.
75. Omar Abdullah
76. Beville Marshall alias Maulana Hasan Anyabwile
77. Oliver Savant alias Ibrahim Savant
78. Brian Young alias Umar Islam
79. Ruben Shumpert
80. Hasan Akbar
81. Denis Boulanger
82. Rabiah Hutchinson
83. Marat Sumolsky


With this list He wanted to show, what he belives results from converting to Islam and according to him "how Islam is changing those citizen".

He also ask "Why there is no such high rate of converts to buddhism, atheism, christianity, who become terrorists?

Thursday, December 14, 2006

Robin Thicke " Lost With You"





The other day I was listening to the radio when an angelic voice came over the dial. The guy whose voice I heard is the bomb and his name is Robin Thicke. Many of you already know Robin's father he is the legendary actor and father in the sitcom "Growing Pains" . If you must go out and get a cd this winter I would encourage you to get this CD.

If you think Justin Timberlake is the sole white soul brotha on the beat you are wrong. Robin Thicke is going places his latest song "Lost With Out You" is a deep song of love and passion. Also to my thousands of white Republican kids who buy and keep hip hop in business you can play this CD in the car with mom and dad.So, without any further adu, I present this week Robin Thicke is the artist of the week for HipHopRepublican.com


Robin Thicke Biography

Early years


Thicke has two famous parents; his mother is actress and vocalist Gloria Loring, while his father, Canadian entertainer Alan Thicke, is best known for his stint on the sitcom Growing Pains. At the ages of 12 and 13, Thicke was a guest actor on several episodes of The Wonder Years and an episode of Growing Pains. He decided to pursue a music career; at the age of sixteen, Thicke became friends with the president of Uptown Records,Andre Harrell, and struck a deal with the fledgling Nu America Records, a subsidiary of Interscope Records.

He also penned a wide range of hits for pop artists such as Usher, Christina Aguilera, Mya, Brandy and Marc Anthony. He is married to actress Paula Patton. Who is pictured on the cover of his "A Beautiful world" album.As an artist, he recorded and performed solely under his surname, Thicke. He would continue to do so until 2005.

The Evolution of Robin Thicke (2006)

The Evolution ... (2006)

In 2005, Thicke guested on the remix of Will Smith's international hit, "Switch". After being signed to The Neptunes label, Star Trak, he began work on his sophomore album entitled The Evolution of Robin Thicke. The first single, "Wanna Love U Girl" (featuring Pharrell) experienced chart success on urban radio in the UK. Thicke changed his appearance, cutting off his trademark long hair, and appeared in a video for the song, directed by Hype Williams.


Nearly a year after the single was released, the album was released on October 3, 2006. The Evolution of Robin Thicke includes songs with Lil Wayne and Faith Evans (on "Got 2 Be Down"), as well as Pharrell. "Lost Without U" will be album's second single. He appears in the music video of this single with his wife, actress Paula Patton. He will continue to promote the album while touring with India.Arie, and then opening for John Legend.

Lost With Out You Lyrics


I’m lost without u
Can’t help myself
How does it feel
To know that I love u baby

I’m lost without u
Can’t help myself
How does it feel
To know that I love u baby

Tell me how u love me more
And how u think I’m sexy baby
That u don’t want nobody else
U don’t want this guy u don’t want that guy u wanna
Touch yourself when u see me
Tell me how u love my body
And how I make u feel baby

U wanna roll with me u wanna hold with me
U wanna stay warm and get out of the cold with me
I just love 2 hear u say it
It makes a man feel good baby
Tell me u depend on me
I need To hear it

I’m lost without u
Can’t help myself
How does it feel
To know that I love u baby

I’m lost without u
Can’t help myself
How does it feel
To know that I love u baby

Baby you’re the perfect shape
Baby you’re the perfect weight
Treat me like my birthday
I want it this way I want it that way I want it
Tell me u don’t want me To stop
Tell me it would break your heart
[ these lyrics found on http://www.completealbumlyrics.com ]
That u love me and all my dirty
U wanna roll with me u wanna hold with me
U wanna make fires and get Norwegian wood with me
I just love To hear u say it
It makes a man feel good baby

I’m lost without u
Can’t help myself
How does it feel

I’m lost without u
Can’t help myself
How does it feel
To know that I love u baby

'Cos you may tell me every morning
Ooooooh Alright babe
Aaah yeah
Oh baby
Oh Darling
Ahh yeah

I’m lost without u
Can’t help myself
How does it feel
To know that I love u baby

I’m lost without u
Can’t help myself
How does it feel
To know that I love u baby

Ooooh Yeah
Oh baby
Oh darling
Ah yeah. Right
Oh baby
Oh darling
Oooh Hoo baby.
All right, right right

Myths of Martin Luther King


by Marcus Epstein

There is probably no greater sacred cow in America than Martin Luther King Jr. The slightest criticism of him or even suggesting that he isn’t deserving of a national holiday leads to the usual accusations of racist, fascism, and the rest of the usual left-wing epithets not only from liberals, but also from many ostensible conservatives and libertarians.

This is amazing because during the 50s and 60s, the Right almost unanimously opposed the civil rights movement. Contrary to the claims of many neocons, the opposition was not limited to the John Birch Society and southern conservatives.

It was made by politicians like Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater, and in the pages of Modern Age, Human Events, National Review, and the Freeman.

Today, the official conservative and libertarian movement portrays King as someone on our side who would be fighting Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton if he were alive. Most all conservative publications and websites have articles around this time of the year praising King and discussing how today’s civil rights leaders are betraying his legacy. Jim Powell’s otherwise excellent The Triumph of Liberty rates King next to Ludwig von Mises and Albert J. Nock as a libertarian hero. Attend any IHS seminar, and you’ll read "A letter from a Birmingham Jail" as a great piece of anti-statist wisdom. The Heritage Foundation regularly has lectures and symposiums honoring his legacy. There are nearly a half dozen neocon and left-libertarian think tanks and legal foundations with names such as "The Center for Equal Opportunity" and the "American Civil Rights Institute" which claim to model themselves after King. Why is a man once reviled by the Right now celebrated by it as a hero?

The answer partly lies in the fact that the mainstream Right has gradually moved to the left since King’s death. The influx of many neoconservative intellectuals, many of whom were involved in the civil rights movement, into the conservative movement also contributes to the King phenomenon. This does not fully explain the picture, because on many issues King was far to the left of even the neoconservatives, and many King admirers even claim to adhere to principles like freedom of association and federalism. The main reason is that they have created a mythical Martin Luther King Jr., that they constructed solely from one line in his "I Have a Dream" speech.


In this article, I will try to dispel the major myths that the conservative movement has about King. I found a good deal of the information for this piece in I May Not Get There With You: The True Martin Luther King by black leftist Michael Eric Dyson. Dyson shows that King supported black power, reparations, affirmative action, and socialism. He believes this made King even more admirable. He also deals frankly with King’s philandering and plagiarism, though he excuses them. If you don’t mind reading his long discussions about gangsta rap and the like, I strongly recommend this book.


Myth #1: King wanted only equal rights, not special privileges and would have opposed affirmative action, quotas, reparations, and the other policies pursued by today’s civil rights leadership.


This is probably the most repeated myth about King. Writing on National Review Online, There Heritage Foundation’s Matthew Spalding wrote a piece entitled "Martin Luther King’s Conservative Mind," where he wrote, "An agenda that advocates quotas, counting by race and set-asides takes us away from King's vision."


The problem with this view is that King openly advocated quotas and racial set-asides. He wrote that the "Negro today is not struggling for some abstract, vague rights, but for concrete improvement in his way of life." When equal opportunity laws failed to achieve this, King looked for other ways. In his book Where Do We Go From Here, he suggested that "A society that has done something special against the Negro for hundreds of years must now do something special for him, to equip him to compete on a just and equal basis." To do this he expressed support for quotas. In a 1968 Playboy interview, he said, "If a city has a 30% Negro population, then it is logical to assume that Negroes should have at least 30% of the jobs in any particular company, and jobs in all categories rather than only in menial areas." King was more than just talk in this regard. Working through his Operation Breadbasket, King threatened boycotts of businesses that did not hire blacks in proportion to their population.


King was even an early proponent of reparations. In his 1964 book, Why We Can’t Wait, he wrote,No amount of gold could provide an adequate compensation for the exploitation and humiliation of the Negro in America down through the centuries…Yet a price can be placed on unpaid wages. The ancient common law has always provided a remedy for the appropriation of a the labor of one human being by another. This law should be made to apply for American Negroes. The payment should be in the form of a massive program by the government of special, compensatory measures which could be regarded as a settlement in accordance with the accepted practice of common law.

Predicting that critics would note that many whites were equally disadvantaged, King claimed that his program, which he called the "Bill of Rights for the Disadvantaged" would help poor whites as well. This is because once the blacks received reparations, the poor whites would realize that their real enemy was rich whites.

Myth # 2: King was an American patriot, who tried to get Americans to live up to their founding ideals.


In National Review, Roger Clegg wrote that "There may have been a brief moment when there existed something of a national consensus – a shared vision eloquently articulated in Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech, with deep roots in the American Creed, distilled in our national motto, E pluribus unum. Most Americans still share it, but by no means all." Many other conservatives have embraced this idea of an American Creed that built upon Jefferson and Lincoln, and was then fulfilled by King and libertarians like Clint Bolick and neocons like Bill Bennett.

Despite his constant invocations of the Declaration of Independence, King did not have much pride in America’s founding. He believed "our nation was born in genocide," and claimed that the Declaration of Independence and Constitution were meaningless for blacks because they were written by slave owners.


Myth # 3: King was a Christian activist whose struggle for civil rights is similar to the battles fought by the Christian Right today.

Ralph Reed claims that King’s "indispensable genius" provided "the vision and leadership that renewed and made crystal clear the vital connection between religion and politics." He proudly admitted that the Christian Coalition "adopted many elements of King’s style and tactics." The pro-life group, Operation Rescue, often compared their struggle against abortion to King’s struggle against segregation. In a speech entitled The Conservative Virtues of Dr. Martin Luther King, Bill Bennet described King, as "not primarily a social activist, he was primarily a minister of the Christian faith, whose faith informed and directed his political beliefs."
Both King’s public stands and personal behavior makes the comparison between King and the Religious Right questionable.


FBI surveillance showed that King had dozens of extramarital affairs. Although many of the pertinent records are sealed, several agents who watched observed him engage in many questionable acts including buying prostitutes with SCLC money. Ralph Abernathy, who King called "the best friend I have in the world," substantiated many of these charges in his autobiography, And the Walls Came Tumbling Down.

It is true that a man’s private life is mostly his business. However, most conservatives vehemently condemned Jesse Jackson when news of his illegitimate son came out, and claimed he was unfit to be a minister.


King also took stands that most in the Christian Right would disagree with. When asked about the Supreme Court’s decision to ban school prayer, King responded,I endorse it. I think it was correct. Contrary to what many have said, it sought to outlaw neither prayer nor belief in god. In a pluralistic society such as ours, who is to determine what prayer shall be spoken and by whom? Legally, constitutionally or otherwise, the state certainly has no such right.

While King died before the Roe vs. Wade decision, and, to the best of my knowledge, made no comments on abortion, he was an ardent supporter of Planned Parenthood. He even won their Margaret Sanger Award in 1966 and had his wife give a speech entitled Family Planning – A Special and Urgent Concern which he wrote. In the speech, he did not compare the civil rights movement to the struggle of Christian Conservatives, but he did say "there is a striking kinship between our movement and Margaret Sanger's early efforts."

Myth # 4: King was an anti-communist.

In another article about Martin Luther King, Roger Clegg of National Review applauds King for speaking out against the "oppression of communism!" To gain the support of many liberal whites, in the early years, King did make a few mild denunciations of communism. He also claimed in a 1965 Playboy that there "are as many Communists in this freedom movement as there are Eskimos in Florida." This was a bald-faced lie. Though King was never a Communist and was always critical of the Soviet Union, he had knowingly surrounded himself with Communists. His closest advisor Stanley Levison was a Communist, as was his assistant Jack O’Dell. Robert and later John F. Kennedy repeatedly warned him to stop associating himself with such subversives, but he never did. He frequently spoke before Communist front groups such as the National Lawyers Guild and Lawyers for Democratic Action. King even attended seminars at The Highlander Folk School, another Communist front, which taught Communist tactics, which he later employed.


King’s sympathy for communism may have contributed to his opposition to the Vietnam War, which he characterized as a racist, imperialistic, and unjust war. King claimed that America "had committed more war crimes than any nation in the world." While he acknowledged the NLF "may not be paragons of virtue," he never criticized them. However, he was rather harsh on Diem and the South. He denied that the NLF was communist, and believed that Ho Chi Minh should have been the legitimate ruler of Vietnam. As a committed globalist, he believed that "our loyalties must transcend our race, our tribe, our class, and our nation. This means we must develop a world perspective."


Many of King’s conservative admirers have no problem calling anyone who questions American foreign policy a "fifth columnist." While I personally agree with King on some of his stands on Vietnam, it is hypocritical for those who are still trying to get Jane Fonda tried for sedition to applaud King.


Myth # 5: King supported the free market.

OK, you don’t hear this too often, but it happens. For example, Father Robert A. Sirico delivered a paper to the Acton Institute entitled Civil Rights and Social Cooperation. In it, he wrote,
A freer economy would take us closer to the ideals of the pioneers in this country's civil rights movement. Martin Luther King, Jr. recognized this when he wrote: "With the growth of industry the folkways of white supremacy will gradually pass away," and he predicted that such growth would "Increase the purchasing power of the Negro [which in turn] will result in improved medical care, greater educational opportunities, and more adequate housing. Each of these developments will result in a further weakening of segregation."
King of course was a great opponent of the free economy. In a speech in front of his staff in 1966 he
said,


You can’t talk about solving the economic problem of the Negro without talking about billions of dollars. You can’t talk about ending the slums without first saying profit must be taken out of slums. You’re really tampering and getting on dangerous ground because you are messing with folk then. You are messing with captains of industry… Now this means that we are treading in difficult water, because it really means that we are saying that something is wrong…with capitalism… There must be a better distribution of wealth and maybe America must move toward a Democratic Socialism.


King called for "totally restructuring the system" in a way that was not capitalist or "the antithesis of communist." For more information on King’s economic views, see Lew Rockwell’s The Economics of Martin Luther King, Jr.

Myth # 6: King was a conservative.

As all the previous myths show, King’s views were hardly conservative. If this was not enough, it is worth noting what King said about the two most prominent postwar American conservative politicians, Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater.


King accused Barry Goldwater of "Hitlerism." He believed that Goldwater advocated a "narrow nationalism, a crippling isolationism, and a trigger-happy attitude." On domestic issues he felt that "Mr. Goldwater represented an unrealistic conservatism that was totally out of touch with the realities of the twentieth century." King said that Goldwater’s positions on civil rights were "morally indefensible and socially suicidal." King said of Reagan, "When a Hollywood performer, lacking distinction even as an actor, can become a leading war hawk candidate for the presidency, only the irrationalities induced by war psychosis can explain such a turn of events."


Despite King’s harsh criticisms of those men, both supported the King holiday. Goldwater even fought to keep King’s FBI files, which contained information about his adulterous sex life and Communist connections, sealed.


Myth # 7: King wasn’t a plagiarist.


OK, even most of the neocons won’t deny this, but it is still worth bringing up, because they all ignore it. King started plagiarizing as an undergraduate. When Boston University founded a commission to look into it, they found that that 45 percent of the first part and 21 percent of the second part of his dissertation was stolen, but they insisted that "no thought should be given to revocation of Dr. King’s doctoral degree." In addition to his dissertation many of his major speeches, such as "I Have a Dream," were plagiarized, as were many of his books and writings. For more information on King’s plagiarism, The Martin Luther King Plagiarism Page and Theodore Pappas’ Plagiarism and the Culture War are excellent resources.


When faced with these facts, most of King’s conservative and libertarian fans either say they weren’t part of his main philosophy, or usually they simply ignore them.

Slightly before the King Holiday was signed into law, Governor Meldrim Thompson of New Hampshire wrote a letter to Ronald Reagan expressing concerns about King’s morality and Communist connections. Ronald Reagan responded, "I have the reservations you have, but here the perception of too many people is based on an image, not reality. Indeed, to them the perception is reality."


Far too many on the Right are worshipping that perception. Rather than face the truth about King’s views, they create a man based upon a few lines about judging men "by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin" – something we are not supposed to do in his case, of course – while ignoring everything else he said and did. If King is truly an admirable figure, they are doing his legacy a disservice by using his name to promote an agenda he clearly would not have supported.


January 18, 2003


Marcus Epstein [send him mail] is an undergraduate at the College of William and Mary in Williamsburg, VA, where he is president of the college libertarians and editor of the conservative newspaper, The Remnant.

A selection of his articles can be seen here.

Has Jay-Z Outgrown Hiphop?"





An article was written about a week entitled "Who The Hell Am I?
Has Jay-Z Outgrown Hiphop?"ago by Andreas Hale for http://www.hiphopdx.com/
Here goes my response…

This is a very well written, informative, and at the same time, inquisitive article. It reached its goal in provoking the thoughts of its reader, while at the same time inducing the reader with the opinion of the author. The less-observant reader will no doubt be persuaded to think that Hip Hop does not want to see the end result of the struggle (represented by Jay-Z, to the writer), and desires more so to continue in an infinite cycle of purposeless "ballin", "hustlin", and "coming-up!"

However, this is where this journalist and I disagree. Its not that Hip Hop does not want to see anyone fulfill their "dreams," its actually the fact that Hip Hop in its origin, at its root, deeply imbedded in its subconscious lies the precepts of its "original doctrine" which is "ACTIVISM." Hip Hop, like the BPP, CIBI, OAAU, etc., began as a "movement" to empower poor ghetto youth in America and eventually the world, with the result being defined here as the "upward mobility" of the "masses" and not the "individual" alone.

So the writer is correct when he says that "What Jay-Z has become is a dream materialized." But, the "dream" of Hip Hop was to see the "community" in a better place and not just one "nigga." What Jay-Z has achieved is nothing more than the "American-Dream", defined here as "the accumulation of personal wealth solely for the upward mobilization of the individual." This "Amerikkkan Dream" has been achieved by many of "niggas" before Hip Hop was born.

The problem has always been that most of our examples of a "nigga" who "made-it" represented "niggas" who failed to be continuously "ACTIVE" in the struggle of the masses of the people from which they came. Black youth in America at the time of Hip Hop's birth had long since abandoned the futility of the American "Dream" because they had seen so many brothers and sisters "make-it" and, yes, for them, the "struggle stopped!" And this my friends is the reason for the "dis-connect" with Jay-Z, Bill Cosby, Bob Johnson, Oprah Winfrey, and all the other "niggas" who represent the Amerikkkan "dream materialized."

Their is NO active presence of any of these "niggas" in the struggle still confronting the "black-communities" from which they came. So, yes "Jay-Z has more money than you (or he) has ever thought of and can now do things that were out of Hip-Hop's collective reach." And so does all the other "niggas" on the long list of "niggas" who "made-it!" But, what do they do? They become spokesmen for @#%$ like "anti-Semitism?" I mean, not one of these niggas have ever put their image and likeness at the front of any real campaign to save the black youth of America (who need them more now than ever), the large majority of whom it is a well documented fact; will not see any parts of the "Amerikkkan Dream!" And this is why a line has been, and rightfully so, drawn between what is Hip Hop and what is rap.

With all this wealth and financial knowledge at his disposal, it seems like the only thing the "Jigga-man" has ACTIVE-ly done for the "black-community" with his money is brag, boast, and stunt in the face of 30 million black youth who literally don't have @#%$.

In the same lyrics quoted by this journalist, Jay-Z also speaks constantly of how he can take the next mans girl and "ball-her-out!" Nigga please, I know you can take my girl to Paris? I work an "honest" 9 to 5, I don't sell crack, I'm not a rapper, I like Hip Hop, I'm a fan of Jay-Z, but, must I be beaten over the head with the fact that you're rich and I'm not? In conclusion, I know that this manifest will be given the infamous "player-hater" status. I know that many will quote bullshit slogans like "I can save the world" or "I don't know the secret to success, but the secret to failure is trying to please everyone."
But, lets imagine for a minute if Harriet Tubman would have adopted this same selfish position, and after she "made-it" to freedom, or after "achieving" that freedom and realizing her "dream" of being a free-woman, said "I can't save the world" or "I don't know the way to freedom, but the secret to slavery is trying to free others" and went shopping in Paris? Well, she didn't and she knew that she could not "save the world" but believed deeply that she could "save the BLACK WORLD" so she ACTIVELY got involved and organized the "Underground Railroad!"
She is the "Poster-Child" for a "sister" who "made-it" to freedom, became the "realization of a dream" but understood that the "dream" was not fulfilled unless it was shared by the "masses." Proper Education Always Counters Exploitation....


WISE INTELLIGENT IZ......

The Talented Timothy Taylor "COMING SOON"

WWW.INTELLIGENTMUZIK.COM

WWW.MYSPACE.COM/WISEINTELLIGENT

Robert Mugabe: Stupid Leftist Dictator Strikes Again



After 26 years of terrorizing Zimbabwe, President Mugabe says he backs moves to let him stay in power until 2010!!!!!!!

Zimbabwe's leader Robert Mugabe has backed a plan to extend his presidency by two years until 2010, according to reports in Zimbabwe's state-run media.

The plan is likely to be endorsed during the annual conference of the ruling Zanu-PF party this weekend.

A Zanu-PF spokesman said postponing presidential elections until they could be held at the same time as parliamentary polls would save money.

The president had said he would retire in 2008 after 28 years in office.

My humble reply...Mugabe is an asshole, Mugabe is an asshole, Mugabe is an asshole, Mugabe is an asshole. I wonder where the hell is the loud condemnation from people who supported this ass hole these same jerks who without flinching never hold back in bash Bush over perceived racist violations of election law and the 2000 election.

Where is former US Rep. Cynthia McKinney, NOI head Louis Farrakhan or NYC councilman Charles Barron and every hate America heart beat at the DC-based Pan African Liberation Organization?

Where are these guys?

{cricket} {cricket} {cricket} {cricket} {cricket}

Picture of Louis Farakhan shaking hands with his buddy Robert Mugabe,
praising him on Mugabe's racist land resettlement program .



"With the help of Allah, we believe we will be successful (with an historic Peace Mission to Africa and the Middle East), as we believe you will too, if the people have the resolve to stay the course and not compromise their valuable principles, in spite of the negativity and the hostility,"

-Min.Louis Farrakhan


Rereading Friedman




By La Shawn Barber

Last month, monetary economist Milton Friedman died at age 94. In 1955, he published a seminal essay titled “The Role of Government in Education.” In the essay, Friedman proposed an idea radical for its time: Unrestricted universal school vouchers would give parents more educational choices for their children and improve education by encouraging competition and innovation. It was the beginning of the school-choice movement.

As a free-market economist, Friedman believed that in a “free private enterprise exchange economy, government’s primary role is to preserve the rules of the game by enforcing contracts, preventing coercion, and keeping markets free.” He then applied this reasoning to education. He specified the three roles that government plays in education — legislating compulsory schooling, financing schooling, and administering schooling — and concluded that, while there was some justification for the first two roles, the administering, or “nationalization,” of schooling was more difficult to rationalize in a free market.

Still Relevant?

Earlier this year, the Cato Institute published Liberty & Learning: Milton Friedman’s Voucher Idea At Fifty, a collection of ten essays edited by Robert C. Enlow and Lenore T. Ealy. Each contributor considers a different way in which Friedman’s school-choice ideas are still relevant.

The collection centers around three themes: school choice and democratic values, challenges to implementing vouchers, and what expanded school choice might look like. Contributors include such writers and researchers as Guilbert C. Hentschke, a professor at the University of Southern California; Jay P. Greene, head of the Department of Education Reform at the University of Arkansas and a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute; Abigail Thernstrom, co-author of No Excuses: Closing the Racial Gap in Learning and a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute; Myron Lieberman, chairman of the Educational Policy Institute; and Andrew Coulson, director of the Cato Institute’s Center for Educational Freedom.

Hentschke opens the discussion by comparing differences in education, households, and government since the 1950s. He argues that parental income and education levels are more highly correlated now than they used to be and that “educational wealth” is a real transferable asset. Because government schools do a relatively poor job of educating, school choice is more important than ever, especially for lower-income families.

Racial Realism
Given the seemingly intractable academic achievement gap between black and white students, essays dealing explicitly with race are compelling. In “A Culture of Choice,” Abigail Thernstrom argues that urban black and Latino students would benefit the most from choice. Much of her work focuses on black inner-city children since black kids’ academic problems seem “more deeply rooted and harder to remedy.”

Thernstrom has spent years assessing student academic performance and contends that even black and Latino kids from affluent families are behind their white and Asian peers because their subcultures are disconnected from “mainstream American values” of choice and responsibility.

But this is not an insurmountable problem for schools, Thernstrom argues. With longer periods of instruction, focus on core academic subjects, and safe and orderly environments, these schools manage to overcome a subculture isolated from the “tacit norms of dominant culture.” Thernstrom writes:

Superior schools in today’s inner cities counter the isolation of black kids from mainstream norms by…[insisting] that their students learn how to speak standard English; show up on time, properly dressed; sit up straight at their desks, chairs pulled in, workbooks organized…walk down halls quickly and quietly…listen to teachers politely and follow their directions precisely; treat their classmates with respect; and shake hands with visitors to the school, introducing themselves.

Good academic and social skills are important for closing the achievement gap, and inner-city schools that work are “of necessity, schools of choice.”

Third-World Private Schools

James Tooley, a professor of education policy at the University of Newcastle, U.K., explores how vouchers targeted to “hardship cases” might play out in the context of developing countries and poor families.

Tooley was surprised to find private schools in third-world countries that cater to the poor, charging between $1 and $3 a month, which is affordable to most of the working poor. In “slum” areas of countries like India, China, Ghana, Nigeria, and Kenya, he discovered that, although facilities at government schools were superior, teacher quality and educational achievement were higher in the private schools.

The existence of private schools for the poor tends to weaken the argument against school vouchers that poor parents are unable or unwilling to pay for their children’s schooling. Tooley proposes that, in the absence of government intervention, “grass-roots privatization of education” might possibly spring up in the United States as it has in developing countries.

Educational Revolution
Under a government education monopoly, the only recourse for most parents faced with poor public schools is to move to a better neighborhood or take their kids out of government schools and pay for their education twice — “once in taxes and once in tuition,” Friedman wrote in the book’s epilogue, a 2005 article. “Just as the breakup of the Ma Bell monopoly led to a revolution in communication, a breakup of the school monopoly would lead to a revolution in schooling.”

School choice would force taxpayer-supported schools to improve and compete for students. A “revolution in schooling” will require a critical mass of parents to demand it.

— La Shawn Barber is a freelance writer and blogger in Washington, D.C. Visit her blog at
www.lashawnbarber.com

Somalia’sIslamists and Ethiopia Gird for a War


The stadium was packed, the guns were cocked and even the drenching rain could not douse the jihadist fire. Thousands of Somalis, from fully veiled, machine-gun- toting women to little boys in baggy fatigues, gathered Friday to rally against what they called foreign aggression. As a squall blew in, they punched wet fists into the air and yelled, “Allahu akbar,” or “God is great.” ......

Click here for detail

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/14/world/africa/14somalia .html?hp&ex=1166158800&en=7bcfbcaf7bbeaa90&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Wednesday, December 13, 2006

Come and get your black babies!

By Edward

Come and get your black babies! while supplies last!
What are all the hip stars doing these days???

Forget plastic surgery, nipple slips and carryin little dogs in your purse! that is soooo 2006. get in on the latest trend! go and get yourself a black baby!



oh yes, brad! that black baby goes perfect with your black sunglasses!


lara croft: negro raider!


like a virgin! touching a negro for the very first time!

"Days ago, she lined up 12 African boys - tots hand-selected for her perusal. She picked out a 1-year-old, David, to take home in her luggage."

=====

SHAMELESS STAR BUYS AN AFRICAN SOUVENIR
By ANDREA PEYSER

October 12, 2006 -- NO WORD - yet - on whether Madonna plans to nail her brand-new bouncing boy to a crucifix, live, in concert.

Madonna, the sluttish, egomaniacal mother-of-the-century has topped even her most revolting self. She plans to remove a baby from the loving arms of his dirt-poor father, in one of the most desperate nations on earth.

Madonna has traveled far beyond her bra-baring, intercourse-simulating, public girl-kissing, Jesus-emulating loser antics to grab attention - and flesh.

The one-named wonder, who already has given birth to two children by two different daddies, one of whom she would not deign to marry, has her heart set on raping Malawi.

Days ago, she lined up 12 African boys - tots hand-selected for her perusal. She picked out a 1-year-old, David, to take home in her luggage.

Well guess what? The boy selected in this freakish slave auction is no AIDS orphan. He's got a biological father, plus a granny - but was placed in an orphanage after his mother died. His family loves him. They just can't afford him.

If Madonna possessed a speck of sanity or shame, she would write a generous check. Instead, the boy's father says he is thrilled at the prospect of a wealthy American carting off his progeny.

Madonna should nail herself on her crucifix - for real, this time.

Malawi is making an exception to its law that forbids foreigners from adopting a baby. Living proof that money talks.

Madonna, who at 48 has more undeserved cash than probably sits in the Malawi treasury, agreed to pay big bucks for the transaction.

In exchange for her human package, she will pour $3 million into a center to help 1,000 Malawi orphans.

She'll also spend a mil on a documentary about the plight of children there. Presumably, this plight does not include Madonna's child purchase.

But wait - there's a catch.

Children educated at Madonna's new orphan center and bin for rejected babies will be taught a curriculum based on her pet religion, kabbala.

There is nothing that money can't buy, I suppose. That is except talent and taste - and moral fiber.

Stop this monster!


Edward is a Republican from New York City and blogger.

http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=207269&blogID=179581747&MyToken=d27e0be2-efc5-46f5-91ce-ad66bb02ffaa

Quotes

Politically the American Negro is nothing but a football and the white liberals control this mentally dead ball through tricks of tokenism: false promises of integration and civil rights. In this profitable game of deceiving and exploiting the politics of the American Negro, those white liberals have the willing cooperation of the Negro civil rights leaders. These "leaders" sell out our people for just a few crumbs of token recognition and token gains. These "leaders" are satisfied with token victories and token progress because they themselves are nothing but token leaders."

-Malcolm X



"There is another class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs -- partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs."

-Booker T. Washington

FLORIDA COPS DRESS IN DRAG



'OFFICER DELICIOUS': FLORIDA COPS DRESS IN DRAG TO CATCH TRAFFIC VIOLATORS...


Officer Delicious, aka West Palm Beach police officer Terry Golden, stands at Okeechobee Boulevard and Jog Road on Wednesday morning as he watches for cars running red lights and alerts nearby fellow officers. "I've seen people drive by eating food and when they see me, the food just falls out of their mouth" Golden said of his outfit. He estimates that more than 100 people were pulled over Wednesday morning. (Uma Sanghvi / The Post)


Enlarged Picture




-Now that's a big girl.

Botswana bushmen win land ruling

The BBC Africa has a report on eminent domain in Africa and how a group
of Bushmen fought back and got there land back.....sound familiar???



Below is a short transcript from the BBC Africa report

Bushmen from the Kalahari desert have won a court case in which they accused Botswana's government of illegally moving them from their land.

The court said the bushmen - or San people - were wrongly evicted from their ancestral homeland in 2002.

A panel of three judges ruled by two-to-one in their favour in the major issues in the case.

The case is seen as a wider test of whether governments can legally move people from their ancestral lands.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/6174709.stm

-What a coincidence much of what is happening there sounds almost like what is going on here in the US. In New York City the Republican mayor Mr. Bloomberg just had the The Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn, New York turned into a private entity , but he is using eminent domain to appropriate private citizens homes.

The mayor hates smoking and hates trans fats but he loves to demolish and take peoples homes for the greater good. Ironically just this year President Bush issued an executive order stating in Section I that the Federal Government must limit its use of taking private property for "public use" with "just compensation", which is also stated in the constitution, for the "purpose of benefiting the general public."

This ring Of "for the greater good"...sounds awfuly Commie!!

Why I Continue to Believe in the War in Iraq


The Temporary Lie

By LYNN CHU

From "Why I Continue to Believe in the War in Iraq," a poem by Lynn Chu, literary agent.


This is an abridgment, first published by Harper's Magazine in September, 2006, of a long poem, the full version of which can be found at writersreps.com by searching on " Lynn Chu."

Because to depose a murderous despot is a good thing.
Because I believe in nation building.
Because the left has always insisted on this.
Because I harbor no animus toward Muslim peoples.
Because we must seed the world with democracy, for it is right.
Because Mesopotamia, the cradle of civilization, deserves no less.
Because containment is impossible in a globalized world.
Because in truth the world respects us for it, however they moan.
Because Iraqis are an educated people fully capable of democracy.
As is all of humanity.
Because we did so with a minimum of human loss.
Because one out of three in the axis of evil is 33.3 percent better than zero.
Because America is as brave and competent as it is reasonable to expect of clumsy, imperfect humans.
Because if Saddam had the bomb in 1981, he would soon have it again.
Because in 1948, to world acclaim, the U.N. created Israel, whose existence is just and must continue to be defended.
For the evil of anti-Semitism still lurks in the world, in radical Islam and elsewhere.
Because the new kind of war will be sporadic, desultory, and covert.
And will bore us, but complacency is dangerous.
Because to them their jihad has only just begun, and crush it we must.
For Osama bin Laden is not Deng Xiao-Ping.
Because our nation is strong enough to shrug off the malice and subversion and sophistries its heedless factions devise.
Who style themselves heroes and whistle-blowers.
For their vanity and venality betrays them.
Because this war's lessons will assist in transformation, which must continue.
For the emasculated CIA and bloated DOD must be reformed.
Because the idea that the world has outgrown war is a fantasy.
Because if we cannot do Iraq then we can never do Rwanda or Darfur.
Because we need to pick our fights.
And there is nothing immoral about making a list ordered by need and self-interest.
Because, when the world is ever really in trouble, fashionable anti-Americanism will fall away.
For all know that America is not the source of evil in the world.
Because people just like to exaggerate. And nowhere is the human condition more on display than in a democracy.
Because we must learn how to replace chaos with democracy.
Because we won in Afghanistan, whose economy is starting to boom.
Because Iraq must continue to "balance" Iran in that region.
Because we can use a Middle East base.
Because civilization is always effortful.
Because the U.N. will save no one.
Because diplomacy is sometimes the path to a solution, but just as often is not.
Because politics is always war by other means.
Because we must expect only carping and ingratitude and have infinite patience.
Because it is the right thing to do and the sophists' words will vanish with the wind.
Because wordsmiths overestimate words.
Because lies, however big, are only temporary.

http://www.nysun.com/article/45020

Tuesday, December 12, 2006

Dr.Kings "Letter to an Anti Semite" a Hoax?




Since posting Dr.Kings "Letter to an Anti Semite" a group of leftist bloggers have been barraging my email box with some of the most obscene replies known to men.

The simple answer to the question of whether the Dr King Letter to an Anti Semite was a hoax is NO and Yes.

It would seem that the letter has no hisrtorical basis but the quotes within the letter do,Martin Luther King supported a free democratic Israeal free of terror this is a fact.

The history behind this debate was started by an article on a website called
CAMERA: Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America where they questioned the authority of the letter.

Below is history of the debate and how it was resolved.
From the media watchdog group CAMERA:

We am sorry to inform you that the “Letter to an Anti-Zionist Friend” allegedly written by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., is apparently a hoax. Although, the basic message of the letter was indeed, without question, spoken by Martin Luther King, Jr. in a 1968 appearance at Harvard, where he said: “When people criticize Zionists, they mean Jews, You are talking anti-Semitism.” [from “The Socialism of Fools: The Left, the Jews and Israel” by Seymour Martin Lipset; in Encounter magazine, December 1969, p. 24. ].

We were initially doubtful of the authenticity of the “Letter to an anti-Zionist Friend” because the language in the first paragraph seemed almost a parody of language used in Dr. King’s “I have a dream” speech. And it was an odd coincidence that the “Letter” was listed as being published in one of the few magazines whose archives are not able to be checked online. Additionally, we could find no reference to the “letter” prior to 1999, which was odd because the text is such a dramatic denunciation of anti-Zionism-one that would have been cited widely.

However, we then found the “letter” in a reputable 1999 book (“Shared Dreams,” by Rabbi Marc Shneier) whose preface was written by Martin Luther King III. Since the King family is known to be extremely careful with Dr. King’s legacy, we assumed they must have verified the accuracy of the book before endorsing it.

Additionally, we found that quotations from the “letter” were used on July 31, 2001, by the Anti-Defamation League’s Michael Salberg in testimony before the U.S. House of Representative’s International Relations Committee’s Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights. The same “source” (Saturday Review, August 1967) for the “letter” that was mentioned in the Schneier book was also cited in the testimony. Since many in the Anti-Defamation League had actually worked with Martin Luther King, Jr. in the civil rights struggle, we assumed again they would be very knowledgeable about King’s work and would have thoroughly checked anything they chose to read before Congress. Based on the apparent verification of the “letter” by the King family and the ADL, we sent the “letter” to you on MLK Day.

However, because we do not ordinarily rely on anyone else’s research, we decided to double-check, by searching back issues of Saturday Review* (Rabbi Shneier’s book had referenced the “letter” as being published in the August 67 Saturday Review). Lo and behold, there is no such letter in any of the August issues, nor do the page and volume numbers cited conform to those actually used by that publication. CAMERA also checked with Boston University, where Dr. King’s work is archived. The archivists too were unable to locate any such letter. We can only conclude that no such letter was written by Dr. King. (Please note we are not implying that the apparently bogus “letter” originated with Rabbi Schneier.)

Since the message of the letter (Anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism) was one Martin Luther King, Jr. had indeed articulated, we can understand why the King family and the ADL did not feel the need to verify the “Letter to an anti-Zionist friend.” We at CAMERA apologize, though, for not looking past their endorsement when we had initial doubts about it. This episode is a reminder of the importance of verifying the authenticity and accuracy of sources, even when they appear to be solid.

Below is a January 21, 2002 op-ed by U.S. Rep. John Lewis, who worked closely with Dr. King. In the op-ed, he shares Dr. King’s views on Israel, views which stressed Israel’s democratic nature and Israel’s need for security. And he also relates that Dr. King said, “When people criticize Zionists they mean Jews, you are talking anti-Semitism.”

This quotation has been confirmed, so you should feel assured that you can use the quotation in letters. Just be sure to mention that it came from Dr. King’s 1968 Harvard University appearance, so that no one will think it is from the debunked “letter.”

The op-ed by Congressman Lewis appears below.

With our sincerest apologies,

Lee Green
Director, National Letter-Writing Group
CAMERA


Op-ed

by Congressman Lewis


Monday, January 21, 2002

“I have a dream” for peace in the Middle East
Martin Luther King Jr.’s special bond with Israel
by John Lewis

THE REV. MARTIN Luther King Jr. understood the meaning of discrimination and oppression. He sought ways to achieve liberation and peace, and he thus understood that a special relationship exists between African Americans and American Jews.

This message was true in his time and is true today.

He knew that both peoples were uprooted involuntarily from their homelands. He knew that both peoples were shaped by the tragic experience of slavery. He knew that both peoples were forced to live in ghettoes, victims of segregation.

He knew that both peoples were subject to laws passed with the particular intent of oppressing them simply because they were Jewish or black. He knew that both peoples have been subjected to oppression and genocide on a level unprecedented in history.

King understood how important it is not to stand by in the face of injustice. He understood the cry, “Let my people go.”

Long before the plight of the Jews in the Soviet Union was on the front pages, he raised his voice. “I cannot stand idly by, even though I happen to live in the United States and even though I happen to be an American Negro and not be concerned about what happens to the Jews in Soviet Russia. For what happens to them happens to me and you, and we must be concerned.”

During his lifetime King witnessed the birth of Israel and the continuing struggle to build a nation. He consistently reiterated his stand on the Israeli-Arab conflict, stating “Israel’s right to exist as a state in security is uncontestable.” It was no accident that King emphasized “security” in his statements on the Middle East.

On March 25, 1968, less than two weeks before his tragic death, he spoke out with clarity and directness stating, “peace for Israel means security, and we must stand with all our might to protect its right to exist, its territorial integrity. I see Israel as one of the great outposts of democracy in the world, and a marvelous example of what can be done, how desert land can be transformed into an oasis of brotherhood and democracy. Peace for Israel means security and that security must be a reality.”

During the recent U.N. Conference on Racism held in Durban, South Africa, we were all shocked by the attacks on Jews, Israel and Zionism. The United States of America stood up against these vicious attacks.

Once again, the words of King ran through my memory, “I solemnly pledge to do my utmost to uphold the fair name of the Jews-because bigotry in any form is an affront to us all.”

During an appearance at Harvard University shortly before his death, a student stood up and asked King to address himself to the issue of Zionism. The question was clearly hostile. King responded, “When people criticize Zionists they mean Jews, you are talking anti-Semitism.”

King taught us many lessons. As turbulence continues to grip the Middle East, his words should continue to serve as our guide. I am convinced that were he alive today he would speak clearly calling for an end to the violence between Israelis and Arabs.

He would call upon his fellow Nobel Peace Prize winner, Yasser Arafat, to fulfill the dream of peace and do all that is within his power to stop the violence.

He would urge continuing negotiations to reduce tensions and bring about the first steps toward genuine peace.

King had a dream of an “oasis of brotherhood and democracy” in the Middle East.

As we celebrate his life and legacy, let us work for the day when Israelis and Palestinians, Jews and Muslims, will be able to sit in peace “under his vine and fig tree and none shall make him afraid.”


U.S. Rep. John Lewis, a Democrat, represents the 5th Congressional District of Georgia and worked closely with Martin Luther King Jr. during the civil rights movement.

http://www.jewish-history.com/mlk_zionism.html


I stand corrected....it would seem that the letter indeed was a hoax
But the most important parts attributed to King were accurate.

Below are a few quotes by King on this topic


1)"Israel’s right to exist as a state in security is uncontestable.”

2)Peace for Israel means security, and we must stand with all our might to protect its right to exist, its territorial integrity. I see Israel as one of the great outposts of democracy in the world, and a marvelous example of what can be done, how desert land can be transformed into an oasis of brotherhood and democracy. Peace for Israel means security and that security must be a reality.”

3)“
I cannot stand idly by, even though I happen to live in the United States and even though I happen to be an American Negro and not be concerned about what happens to the Jews in Soviet Russia. For what happens to them happens to me and you, and we must be concerned.”

4)During an appearance at Harvard University shortly before his death, a student stood up and asked King to address himself to the issue of Zionism. The question was clearly hostile. King responded, “When people criticize Zionists they mean Jews, you are talking anti-Semitism.”

5)“I solemnly pledge to do my utmost to uphold the fair name of the Jews-because bigotry in any form is an affront to us all.”

By Andrew G. BostomFrontPageMagazine.com

January 20, 2003


Martin Luther King, Jr. possessed a remarkable clarity of vision and purpose. He complemented these attributes with a sound, empathic understanding of the history of human oppression. Dr. King's unequivocal renunciation of anti-Zionism reflected his consistent, courageous opposition to all manifestations of bigotry. Against the backdrop of resurgent Jew hatred worldwide, epitomized by the hypocritical September 2001 Durban Conference on "Racism", Dr. King's candid, thoughtful reflections on the true nature of anti-Zionism are particularly edifying.
Shortly before his death, Dr. King had the moral courage to confront the burgeoning Jew hatred of both extreme leftwing Black organizations, including the Black Panthers and the radicalized Student Non-violent Coordinating Committee, as well as the Black Muslims. For example, during a 1968 appearance at Harvard University, he stated bluntly:

"When people criticize Zionists, they mean Jews, You are talking anti-Semitism." [ from "The Socialism of Fools: The Left, the Jews and Israel" by Seymour Martin Lipset; in Encounter magazine, December 1969, p. 24. ].


King immediately recognized anti-Zionism as anti-Semitism- Judenhass - refusing to indulge what he believed was simply another manifestation of the same hatred confronting Blacks. As Georgia Congressman John Lewis, who worked closely with Dr. King during the civil rights movement, observed last year on Martin Luther King Day,"He knew that both peoples [i.e., Blacks and Jews] were uprooted involuntarily from their homelands. He knew that both peoples were shaped by the tragic experience of slavery. He knew that both peoples were forced to live in ghettoes, victims of segregation. He knew that both peoples were subject to laws passed with the particular intent of oppressing them simply because they were Jewish or black. He knew that both peoples have been subjected to oppression and genocide on a level unprecedented in history."


(San Francisco Chronicle, Monday, January 21, 2002)
Historically, 20th century black intellectuals prominent before Dr. King had regarded the Zionist movement favorably because of their own strong impulses for self-determination. W.E.B. DuBois in 1919 wrote, "the African movement means to us what the Zionist movement must mean to the Jews.." In 1941, DuBois elaborated that Palestine was, "the only refuge that harassed Jewry has today". During Israel’s War of Independence, Menachem Begin recalled that Dr. Ralph Bunche, Jr. conveyed to him, "I can understand you. I am also a member of a persecuted minority."

Dr. King’s empathic awareness revealed a profound understanding of both the Jews complex embrace of Zionism, and the thinly veiled Jew hatred inherent in anti-Zionism, "After 2000 years of exile, the Jewish People has emerged traumatized. The source of that trauma has been the constant insecurity and fear that characterized most of the Diaspora, in most parts of the world. It is a product of landlessness, massacres, periodic expulsion and flight, persecution by tyrants and abuse by the Church and Mosque who encouraged antisemitism to satisfy their own insecurities and political desires. …Physical security for the Jews has traditionally been improved in a number of ways: usefulness, mobility, bribery and assimilation.

Psychological responses to this insecurity and trauma are well known: self-hatred and blame, identification with and appeasement of abusers, obsessive fantasy of a future paradise on earth. These solutions and responses are so integrated into the Jewish psyche that they have been passed down from generation to generation, displaying themselves even in relatively free societies, even in America and the recently liberated homeland, Israel….Despite its significance to the Jewish Nation, the State of Israel has failed to alleviate most of this trauma, and has not reduced the levels of antisemitism - it has simply allowed antisemites to masquerade themselves under the new banner of "anti-Zionism".

We cannot expect antisemitism to disappear - Jewish existence and Jewish philosophy will always be threatening to its children: Christianity, and Islam... The trauma and insecurity, on the other hand, is within our power to diminish - should we decide to do so…And what is anti-Zionist? It is the denial to the Jewish people of a fundamental right that we justly claim for the people of Africa and freely accord all other nations of the Globe. It is discrimination against Jews, my friend, because they are Jews. In short, it is antisemitism….The antisemite rejoices at any opportunity to vent his malice. The times have made it unpopular, in the West, to proclaim openly a hatred of the Jews. This being the case, the antisemite must constantly seek new forms and forums for his poison. How he must revel in the new masquerade! He does not hate the Jews, he is just 'anti-Zionist'!..."


Dr. King’s deep historical, theological, and social understanding are sorely missed. But there are hopeful signs. The influence of shrill, shallow demagogues such as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, may be waning. Their hypocritical agenda has been exposed: A perverse "Third Worldism", where jihad terror against a democratic Israel is rationalized, while the slaughter, enslavement, and mutilation of tens of thousands of Black African South Sudanese Christians and animists during a jihad campaign waged against them by the Islamist Arab Khartoum government, is ignored. The indifference of Reverends Jackson and Sharpton notwithstanding, Dr. Charles Jacobs, an Orthodox Jew and founder of the American Anti-Slavery Group, helped forge an extraordinary coalition with Congressional Black Caucus members, as well as various Christian and Jewish organizations, that lobbied successfully for the passage of the Sudan Peace Act. Columnist Nat Hentoff summarized the salient features of this legislation as follows
(
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20021104-26222734.htm ):


"…The Sudan Peace Act authorizes $300 million to aid the blacks in the south over the next three years for humanitarian purposes and ‘to prepare the population for peace and democratic governance.’ Under the law, the president is to certify every six months that the Khartoum government and the [South] Sudan People's Liberation Army are negotiating in good faith. If he finds that they are not, sanctions go into effect. As described, for example, by the [Human Rights organization] Freedom House, if there is evidence of ‘continued bombing of civilians, slave raids, and bans on relief flights,’ the United States will oppose ‘international loans and credits to Khartoum,’ and among other punitive actions, seek ‘a U.N. Security Council Resolution to impose an arms embargo on Khartoum.’.. ."


It is reassuring to see the direct, lasting impact of Dr. King’s noble legacy on this contemporary struggle for human rights: as an impressionable college student, Dr. Jacobs stood on the Washington mall listening to the "I Have a Dream" speech.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=5628

I hope this helps sum up this matter

THE BACHELOR In Swaziland


"If Mswati's not getting laid, nobody is"


King Mswati III

COUNTRY: Swaziland

REIGN OF TERROR: 1986–present

HOW HE BROKE INTO THE BUSINESS: As then-crown prince, succeeded where dad left off

In Spain they have Pamplona's running of the bulls; in Swaziland they have the Reed Dance. Instead of nervous townsfolk running through the streets pursued by temperamental bovines, 50,000 nervous, bare-breasted virgins frolic in a stadium before their hot-blooded King Mswati III. Since 1999, the event has operated under the guise of honoring maidenhood, but the not-so-secret secret is that it's more like The Bachelor meets The Real: World Denver for royals. Apparently the absolute monarch has used it as a way to select who will be his next wife. Last year, for instance, the then 37-year-old king chose a 17-year-old spouse from the line-up of tens of thousands.

But in taking on his thirteenth wife—a teenager—he violated his own law. In 2001, in an effort to stop the spread of AIDS in Swaziland, he imposed a five year ban on sex for teenage girls. The maidens were required to wear woolen tassels that signaled their purity oath. However, when the absolute monarch met his match at the Reed Dance, he ordered all chastity tassels be burned to mark the end of the ritual. Had he not made this decree he would have been—under his own law—fined one cow for the offense.


http://www.radaronline.com/features/2006/12/autocrats.php

"President Barack Obama"



Quote:


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Sen. Barack Obama said Sunday that he may run for president in 2008, despite previous assertions that he would complete his current six-year senatorial term, which ends in 2011. "I would say I am still at the point where I have not made a decision to pursue higher office, but it is true that I have thought about it over the last several months," the 45-year-old Democratic senator from Illinois told NBC's "Meet the Press."
In January, Obama told NBC that he would not run for president or vice president in 2008. Asked Sunday about his earlier stance, Obama said, "That was how I was thinking at that time." "I don't want to be coy about this, given the responses that I've been getting over the last several months," he said.


"I have thought about the possibility, but I have not thought about it with the seriousness and depth that I think is required." Obama has given a slew of interviews in recent weeks to television shows, magazines and other publications to promote his new book, "The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream." The book, published last week, touches on themes of race and identity.




I do like Obama and see very little differences in his style and other moderate black Republicans who have won office in the past What is so sad is the RNC outreach department has ignored the black vote to such a degree that a whole new generation of black young politicians are coming to power in the halls if the Democrat Party.In truth many of them sound very Republican as many of there race opponents make note of.This new pedigree is tough, conservative in may areas but in most areas sound like Colin Powell.
The questions many Republicans should be asking themselves is how come these guys passed our party to join the Democrats.
Im not sure what the future wil hold for Seantor. Obama, maybe the Senator should consider finishing his term first? But if all else fails he could be VP on ticket with Cruella Pelosi.
One note according to John Harwood, one of Slick Willie's assistants informed Harwood Obama is pursing the 2008 bid for president., but Hillary isn't.




Rick Santorum's Last Speech



Hattip http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/

If you haven't read Rick Santorum's speech, read it <<<<<

The attacks on this men by the left was so hateful and targeted .This man has to run in '08 he is simply Churchillian in tone.

Mr. SANTORUM.

Mr. President, I rise today to talk about why I voted against Dr. Gates and lay out in detail the concerns I have about the security posture of the United States today and how I do not believe that Dr. Gates is the appropriate choice to confront them.

While I think he certainly has a lot of positive qualities, and in normal times I would certainly defer to the President's judgment on this, we are not in normal times. I believe we need a Secretary--and I think we need leaders in this country, particularly the Secretary--who has insight into the nature of our enemy and is willing to provide the vision necessary, not just for our people in the military but the country, on how to defeat them. On one particular vital aspect of that vision I think he is in error, and that error causes me to object and to vote no to his nomination.

What I would like to do is lay out what I see as the problem confronting America and the complexity of that problem, which I think has grown more complex since the last time that we have been in this Chamber, over 6 weeks ago. I would like to go back to two speeches I gave last summer, one at the National Press Club, and the other at the Pennsylvania Press Club--one obviously in Washington, the other in Harrisburg. I gave those speeches because I thought it was important that at a time when our country is at war and our country is struggling with this war that we have a better definition as to who the enemy is and what we need to do about it. I made that issue, the issue I discussed in these two speeches and subsequent speeches during my campaign, the centerpiece of the campaign. Many political advisers suggested to me that this was a wrong tactic in a State where the favorabilities for the war and the President were in the low thirties to make this the centerpiece and, in fact, draw divisions between myself and the President where I put myself in a position which some suggested was to the right of the President. But I thought it was important for the country and for me personally as a U.S. Senator to address the issues that I thought were critical to the time.

So I went out and gave two speeches about the importance of defining our enemy. If there has been a failing--obviously, for the last several weeks and months we have been talking about the failings of the administration with respect to the policies within Iraq--I would make the argument that the larger failing, not just of the administration but of the Members of Congress and leaders in this country, is that we have not had the courage to stand up and define the enemy as to who they are and study and understand them and explain to the American people who they are.

I defined the enemy back at the National Press Club speeches as Islamic fascism. I said that is the biggest issue of our time, this relentless and determined radical enemy that is not just a group of rag-tag people living in caves but, in fact, people with an ideology, a plan, and increasingly the resources to carry out that plan, as well as, increasingly, a bigger and larger presence throughout the Islamic world, these radical Islamic fascists.

As I said, I understand this is an unpopular war. When I stepped forward to define the enemy as radical Islamic fascists, I was ridiculed by the media and others, saying that my words were too harsh, saying that at worst my defining the enemy was incorrect, at best it was inflammatory. But I did so because I believe words matter. If you are going to confront an enemy you have to understand who that enemy is and you have to communicate that to the people of America. And we must do that.

Many people talk about this war as if it is an attempt simply to create fledgling democracies in Iraq and Afghanistan. While this may be an appealing possible outcome, we all must recognize that Iraq and Afghanistan are battlefields in a much more complex and broader war. That includes every continent with the exception of Antarctica. The war is at our doorstep, and it is fueled, as I mentioned, literally and figuratively by the evil of Islamic fascism.

Whether we know it or not, they have been at war with us, and the State of Iran specifically has been at war with us, since 1979 when they declared war against the United States. They have not rescinded that declaration. So when we talk about engaging Iran as the Secretary, the new, future Secretary of Defense has talked about, we are talking about engaging someone who is at war with us, who has declared war with us, and who has been at war and, and as I will talk about here, and I think it has been widely reported in the press, has been doing a lot to substantiate the claim that they have been at war with us.

But this threat is not exclusively based in Iran. It is gaining strength and spreading throughout every region of the world. I have addressed the issue of Islamic fascism but have not yet spoken to the subject of Iraq. Iraq is the central front in the war on Islamic fascism. However, contrary to the Iraqi Study Group, the Baker-Hamilton commission, the answer to this problem can be found--the answer to Iraq can be found not in Iraq but in Iran. It is Iran and its client State of Syria that serve as the principal instigators and fomenters of the conflict in Iraq today.

The President gets advice from the CIA that the opposition in Iran is weak and divided and therefore we should do nothing in Iran because we have no alternative. We have no one we can use in Iraq to confront the Iranian Government to cause any kind of changes. So the President gets advice from his intelligence team that we are without options in Iran.

The Pentagon advises the President and says we don't know if we have the resources to open up a new battlefield or confront, militarily, Iran, and therefore we have limited options in Iran.

The State Department--yes, State Department--they think that Iran is the solution to the problem; that negotiating with them and getting them to be our pals can in effect solve the problems; so confronting Iran would be the absolutely wrong thing to do in solving the problem in Iraq.

So the President is being advised by all of his minions that Iran and confrontation with Iran is not an option, as we heard from the testimony of the new Secretary of Defense.

Let's look at other interested parties as we look at how we solve the problem in Iraq and dealing with Iran. The American media seems to be very focused and spends a lot of time talking about how poorly things are going in Iraq. They report daily--not just recently but repeatedly for the past 3 years, daily--the body count in Iraq. It is the lead and has been virtually every single day for 3 years.

Is their interest in shifting focus and covering the problems in Iran? Not if we can drive home a story like this in Iraq.

Republicans and Democrats, leaders in the Congress, why don't they focus and talk more about Iran? Democrats, if you look through--as unfortunately many Republicans and Democrats do--look at it through the eyes of politics, why would we change focus and focus on Iran as the problem? We saw from the last election there is grand political advantage of keeping the focus on Iraq and the problems in Iraq. Why aren't the Republicans, then, stepping forward and pointing to the difficulty and problems that Iran is causing in Iraq and call for confrontation? If we saw anything from the last election, the American public has no appetite for a broadening of this war, increasing the complexity of this war. You might be seen as warmongering, digging us deeper and more dangerously into a region of the world that we would rather not be in in the first place.

So what do we have? We have the Baker-Hamilton report which is a prescription for surrender. It is just a matter of time. It is certainly not a prescription for victory. Nowhere does it mention, other than of course that we would like victory, nor is there a prescription for victory in that report.

So now we have the slow process of how we exit ourselves because we have no option to confront the real problem. We have no willingness on the part of any level of Government to confront it. So we are destined at this point to focus on something that is insolvable without confronting Iran, and that is the war in Iraq.

Who are these Iranians? Who are these Islamic fascists? I do not mean to exclude Sunni Islamic fascists because they were the principal--or they were the first, let's put it that way--in launching the war against the United States. I should not say the first. They were the first in recent times--certainly 9/11--in launching the war.

So this is not just a Shia problem, but it is increasingly becoming a Shia-dominated field as they continue to spread control in Iran with their influence and money. But let's not leave out Saudi Arabia and others that have used their resources to foment Islamic fascism all over the world with their resources--Sunni Islamic fascism.

So where are we? What can we do to confront this problem?

The interesting thing is that this problem is growing--I don't know about exponentially, but I don't know of a single country in the Middle East where the threat of radical Islam has not grown over the last 30 years, since Iran took over control--since the radicals took over control in Iran, the last 27 years. Every capital, every regime is feeling the pressure. And not just since 2003, but systematically over the years we have seen, particularly in Arab Muslim countries and Middle Eastern Muslim countries, this rise. But, again, not exclusive: Indonesia, Malaysia--this is not exclusive to the Arab world. Obviously Iran, which is Persia.

So what have we seen over the past 6 months? We saw a situation in the central synagogue in Prague where the Islamic fascists intended to carry out, on Rosh Hashanah, a mass kidnaping when large numbers of Jews would be celebrating the new year. When the world's attention now was focused on Prague, they designed to make impossible demands and then blow up the synagogue and everyone within it. Those people were not marked for death because they supported the war in Iraq. They were not marked for death because they oppressed these Islamic fascists. They were targeted because they were Jews. This is evil.

Islamic terrorists organized an assault on civilian aircraft leaving London, planning to blow up 10 or more planes this summer as they flew over the North Atlantic. You may not know that two of those participants were a husband and a wife, a husband and a wife who were going to board that plane and explode that plane over the North Atlantic while holding in their arms their 6-month-old child.

This is evil.

Islamic terrorists slaughter innocent Iraqis every single day on both sides of the divide within Islam. As we know, in recent days they beheaded an orthodox priest and crucified a 14-year-old boy guilty of nothing but being Christian.

This is evil.

Almost everyone has now heard of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the fact that he denies the existence of the Holocaust and called for Israel to be wiped off the face of the Earth. But he has been remarkably clear about his mission, remarkably clear about his messianic vision of a Shiite religion, his vision to destroy the Western world and impose a caliphate on the world in which the world would submit to Islam or die in the process.

He said:

Is it possible for us to witness a world without America and Zionism?

Then he answered himself:

But you had best know this slogan and this goal is attainable and surely can be achieved.

So do we have any questions about the nature of our enemy? Do we have any questions about the capability of this oil-rich country? Yet just this past week President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad sent an open letter, a conciliatory letter, to the American people, addressed to the ``noble'' American people. He called on America to withdraw from Iraq and end support for Israel, and, of course, to convert to Islam. This man may be a fanatic, but let me assure you he is not a stupid fanatic. This man understands and studies America. The Islamic fascists respect us enough to get to know us. They respect us enough so they know what buttons to push and how hard to push them. They respect us enough to figure out what it will take to defeat us.

I wish that were the case for the American people.

He couched his warning in the words that are familiar and comfortable with Americans--``freedom,'' trying to appeal that he would be free of this illegitimate regime in his mind, which is the current administration, and we would free them of this burden of fighting. It is a great appeal and many would like to see the end of this war, but we should not be fooled.

Our troops in Iraq are being killed by Iranian weapons today paid for with Iranian money smuggled into Iraq by Iranian logistics and utilized by Iranian-trained terrorists.

A couple of years ago you needed a security clearance to know this. Now, if you care to know, if you want to know this uncomfortable truth about Iran, you can know it. Iran is the centerpiece in the assault against us and other countries in the civilized world, which is why I fought so hard for passage of the Iran Freedom and Support Act.

I stood on the Senate floor at this very desk and argued in May or June of this year for passage of the Iran Freedom and Support Act. I said we should not be negotiating with Iran, that we should be confronting Iran.

Bernard Lewis tells a familiar opinion that he has. He tells a lot of them. He said that the oddity in particular of the Arab and Middle Eastern Islamic world is that the more we have strong relations with the government in an Arab Muslim country the more the people of that country hate us; and the more that we stand up and confront leadership of those countries the more the people like us. Is it no wonder he recounts on the day of 9/11 when there was but one Middle Eastern Muslim capital there was a candlelight vigil in support of those who died on 9/11, and that was in Tehran, Iran.

It is not hard to understand when you have regimes throughout the Middle East who oppress their people that when you stand up and confront those regimes and call them the evil they are the people understand and respect your honesty, agree with you, and support you.

This summer when we attempted to negotiate with Iran, we told the people of Iran that we are not on their side, that we want to make deals with people who oppress them, who torture them, who enslave them, who abuse them, and who kill them. That is why we should not have entered into any negotiations in spite of the entreaties of Europe with this evil regime in Iran. We should confront them, and only confront them. If we want the support of the people of Iran, we have to earn it with the integrity of our mission, and we are not doing that.

So I stood up on the floor of the Senate and said we needed to confront Iran, that we needed to fund full democracy groups, that we needed to use the public airwaves and the Internet to disseminate information to cause a change in the Government of Iran, and that we needed to sanction them. And this administration opposed me. The Senate opposed me by, I think, a 54-to-46 vote. That is why I continue to work on the Iran Freedom and Support Act.

Over the intervening months, what happened? Iran did as I predicted on this floor back in the spring--they played us along. They said: Well, you know we will negotiate with you as long as we can continue to produce nuclear materials and continue our nuclear program. So we negotiated and we negotiated and they developed and they developed. So finally in September of this year, enough people on both sides of the aisle and enough people in the administration finally were convinced that this was not a viable strategy anymore. What did we gain? We passed the Iran Freedom and Support Act, which probably surprised most people in this Chamber. We passed it unanimously--one of the last things we did before we broke. Most Americans don't know it. Unfortunately, most in the Middle East don't know it. I suspect if we went into the bowels of the State Department they may know it, but they are not going to do a damned thing about it because that is not their intent. They do not want to do anything about it. My guess is they will take that money and spend it on a lot of conferences and studies on what we should do instead of giving it to the bus drivers who went on strike as a strike fund so they can stand up to the government. Instead of giving it to dissent groups so they can disseminate information, instead of actively engaging we will appease. We will study, we will delay, and they will have time to further build.

But we did pass the bill. That would be on one of my to-do lists in the next Congress.

Is this bill going to be enforced? Are we going to confront Iran? Are we going to try to do something or are we going to sit by and allow them to develop these weapons? They are not developing them alone. No, there are a lot of reports that they are working with others around the world. Who are those others? I talk about Islamic fascism, and I keep focusing on that. But, unfortunately, over the past several months it is increasingly clear to me that the situation is becoming even more complex. We are not just facing a group of people who are in the Middle East desiring to overthrow the world and oppose a caliphate on us, but they have allies--unlikely allies in some respects, unlikely allies as the German Nazis and Japanese imperialists who had very conflicting ideologies but had a common purpose, and that was destroy the West, destroy the English-speaking world and the Western world, and put it under the domination of those countries.

So it is today. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. What Iran has found and the Islamic fascists have found is there are plenty of enemies of the United States. In fact, they had a meeting just this year a couple of months ago in Havana, Cuba. The nonaligned states met. There were 100 nations. On their agenda was to redefine the word ``terror'' to include ``the U.S. occupation of Iraq'' and the ``Israeli invasion'' of Lebanon. Of course, there was no mention about the incursion of Hezbollah. They found solace with these countries. We saw it played out at the United Nations just a couple of weeks later where President Ahmadinejad, President Hugo Chavez, to thunderous applause of many in the United Nations community, demonized America. But another member of that crew of nonaligned nations was North Korea.

I mentioned before that Iran is pursuing a nuclear program. They are indeed pursuing a nuclear program, and there have been many intelligence reports published that have suggested there were Iranian scientists there the day North Korea exploded their nuclear weapon. In fact, the scientist who had been working with North Korea, AQ Kahn, is the same scientist who has been working with Iran in the development of their nuclear program. Some have suggested that they are working collaboratively and jointly in their development of nuclear weapons which, of course, would have put Iran's nuclear program well ahead of where everyone believes it to be.

So we have not only the Islamic fascists led by Iran, but we now have an alliance between Iran and North Korea; North Korea, which is a threat in their own right, now with nuclear weapons and their increasing ability to deliver them with long-range missiles, including the development of, as they hope to do, ICBMs which could reach the United States of America.

We confronted North Korea as soon as they detonated their explosives. We had a U.N. resolution confronting them. North Korea condemned that nuclear U.N. resolution and called it ``a declaration of war'' and threatened the United States by declaring:

We will deliver merciless blows without hesitation to whoever tries to breach our sovereignty and right to survive under the excuse of carrying out a United Nations Security Council resolution.

Not only do we have a threat of North Korea now launching a nuclear weapon, but we have the clear threat of North Korea and Iran proliferating nuclear technology. In addition, as Iran, working with North Korea, develops their nuclear program, and as the world sits fecklessly by and lets them do it, others in the region legitimately have their tensions increased and have talked about the need for those nations to develop nuclear weapons,

Thus starting an arms race in a region of the world where it is the last place we want a nuclear arms race.

Finally, we have the issue of whether this nuclear material that is being developed in both North Korea and Iran will end up in the hands of terrorists, to be delivered in a nonconventional way. North Korea is a new threat on the horizon, but it is not alone. In fact, North Korea has expressed direct support for Iran's nuclear development program and stressed that the United States and the West have no right to defy such a program.

The Iranians have also commented officially on friendly ties between Tehran and Pyongyang after the Islamic revolution, saying Iran ``highly praises North Korea for its steadfastness against the domineering policies of the United States.''

But the threat goes even further. Ahmadinejad, with Kim Jong Il, like Mussolini and Hitler, intends to conquer Western civilization. Again, that is not Hitler. But they also, like the Soviets under Nikita Khrushchev, see the advantage of placing weapons of mass destruction within short ranges of the United States.

Obviously, one likely candidate would be Venezuela. I don't know of any regime currently that is more vehement and more anti-American than Hugo Chavez and the regime in Venezuela, so it probably comes as no surprise that Ahmadinejad and Chavez have had meetings, and they are now aligned and allies and working together and have, in fact, formed a defense pact between the two countries.

Venezuela is a serious threat not just because of their relationship within Iran but because of what it has attempted to do throughout the region, as well as its own potential threat.

Just a few weeks ago there was an election in Nicaragua, right before our election, where Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega won the election, took a congratulatory call from Hugo Chavez, who said:

We're happy here. We're very proud of you.

Now, like never before, the Sandinista revolution and the Bolivarian revolution unite, to construct the future, socialism of the 21st century.

Chavez made no secret about his support for Ortega or his support for the new rulers in Bolivia. Chavez is doing all he can to build military power and might and influence in the region of the world that is uncomfortably close to the United States.

As we know, Chavez has been clear about his disdain for America. What we don't know is what Venezuela has been up to. I suspect that most Members of this Senate do not know that Venezuela is the leading buyer of foreign arms and military equipment in the world today, that Chavez is building an army of more than 1 million soldiers. I suspect most in this Senate do not know that over the next year he plans to spend $30 billion to build 20 military bases in neighboring Bolivia which will dominate the borders of Chile, Peru, Paraguay, Argentina, assembling those military bases on the borders of the countries I just mentioned. These military bases, while they will be manned by Bolivian soldiers, will be commanded by Venezuelan and Cuban officers.

How does he do this? How is he able to accomplish what Fidel Castro has been seeking to accomplish now for 4 1/2 decades? The answer to that, of course, is very simple. It is a three-letter word: oil. Oil and its huge profits are financing this, just like oil and its huge profits are advancing Islamic fascism in the Middle East. It is no wonder again that Venezuela and Iran have formed an oil pact. Why? As they have clearly said before, oil is a ``geopolitical weapon,'' according to Chavez. He also said:

I could easily order the closing of the refineries we have in the United States. I could easily sell that oil that we sell to the United States to other countries of the world ..... to real friends and allies like China.

They have even closer relationships with the Islamic fascists in Iran. A recent congressional report found that Hezbollah may right now have established bases in Venezuela which have issued thousands of visas to people from places such as Cuba and the Middle East, possibly giving them passports to a vague United States border security.

To make matters worse, we see, with the help of Venezuela, Cuba and China are now exploring for oil within 50 miles of the coast of the United States, while the Senate blocks a measure to allow us to explore for oil within 100 miles of our own shore. So while China, Cuba, and Venezuela draw oil from our shores, we stand idly by and let them do it to arm against us.

Let's not overlook the role of Russia in working with all of these governments--Iran, North Korea, and Venezuela. Last summer, Russia signed an arms deal with Venezuela to the tune of $1 billion. Last month, Russia began deliveries to Iran of highly sophisticated SA-15 anti-aircraft missiles valued at $700 million. The purpose of these missiles? To defend Iran's nuclear program. That shouldn't come as a surprise. Russia has consistently

opposed the efforts of the United States to sanction the other enemy, North Korea, for their nuclear programs, and has insisted on diluting the effects of every resolution that was passed condemning North Korea. The Russians claim sanctions don't work. Yet, oddly enough, they just imposed sanctions on their neighbor, Georgia.

Yes, we live in a very complex time and we have enemies who are very dangerous, in which their relationships are growing, and so with it their commensurate power to confront terrorists of the world, and the rest of the world sits and hopes and hopes that we can negotiate our way out of this problem; that since we are people of reason and rational folks, we can deal with them on that level. Have we forgotten our history? We have been in this situation before.

I have titled this address ``The Gathering Storm of the 21st Century.'' It is not a coincidence that I do so in harkening to the book written by Winston Churchill, ``The Gathering Storm,'' talking about the lead-up to World War II. Just like Britain in 1940, after the fall of France, we are engaged with a struggle now with the enemy--alone. Just like Britain in 1940, we entreated the rest of the world to join us against this evil, and the world fell silent. For a year and a half until Pearl Harbor, and actually long after that, since the United States was certainly not prepared for war, Britain fought this battle alone. And with the exception of the State of Israel, we are fighting this battle alone, and I suspect we will for quite some time. So what lesson can we learn? What lesson can we learn from history? What we know is America is very reticent to get involved in wars, and rightfully so. In the First World War, we only entered after a German U-boat sank American civilian and commercial ships in the North Atlantic. World War I was the war to end all wars. After the defeat of the German armies, it seemed as if peace was going to be with us for a long time. But it did not last a generation. As I said, we ended up with the situation in World War II. But even after the fall of Europe to the Nazis and the Italian fascists, America stood by, hoping this problem would go away. It was not until Pearl Harbor that things changed.

The Cold War was only after Stalin's aggression in the Middle East in Greece that we decided to engage and recognize that the Soviet Union was not our friend as many thought after World War II but, in fact, our new foe. And now, after the fall of the Soviet Union we thought we would have a peace dividend, peace for a long time, and we find that other forces of evil have cropped up to confront us.

If it were not for the fact of September 11, we would be allowing that to continue today. But we engaged the enemy because they attacked us directly here at home. But now we are growing tired. We are wearying of the battle. I said earlier that these Islamic fascists understand us better than we understand them. They understand our history better than we understand their history. They need not look long to see how quickly America tires of confrontation and conflict and death.

And so they plan and, more importantly, they kill, every day. It is recorded here every day, and support for this war goes down every day. And they check another box in Tehran.

Winston Churchill wrote in ``The Gathering Storm'' a short description of the gathering storm:

How the English-speaking peoples, through their unwisdom, carelessness and good nature allowed the wicked to rearm.

We are at such a moment. Are we going to allow the wicked to rearm? We paid a terrible price for waiting. We lock at each war, each major conflict, we paid a terrible price for waiting. In many cases, it was a price paid in America. In many other cases it was a price paid in countries around the world. Are we going to pay that price at some day in the future or are we going to confront this enemy?

If we learned anything from the 20th century, it should be this lesson: When leaders say they are prepared to kill millions of people to achieve their goal, we must take them at their word. The enemy before us that I have described has said it clearly, repeatedly, and pointedly, and even more threateningly, because this is an enemy who doesn't see death as a tragic consequence of the war; they see it as their objective of war.

The ayatollah and the mullahs of Iran have repeatedly said that the object of jihad is not success, it is death. It is reaching the next level. It is ending this miserable life which we have on Earth and in pursuit of jihad, guaranteeing yourself eternal life with Allah.

Here in America, we refuse to recognize, many, that we are at war with this great evil.

We shrink from the recognition of identifying the enemy and confronting them, whether they be the Islamic fascists led by Iran or the socialist rulers of North Korea and Venezuela. We are sleep-walking through the storm, as we have done in the past. We pretend it is not happening or that it is simply because of the incompetency of the current administration or of a member of that administration.

But how do those who deny this evil propose to save us from these people? By negotiating through the U.N. or directly with Iran? By firing Don Rumsfeld, now getting rid of John Bolton? That is going to solve the problem? These people are now going to be nice to us because we removed these people who were agitating them or causing problems? Maybe relocating our troops to Okinawa or Kuwait or some other place will get these people to simply leave us alone? Maybe if we just abandon Iraq and Afghanistan to the chaos and slaughter of Islamic fascists, their thirst for blood will be met? Or maybe it is just engaging in one-on-one discussions with Iran and North Korea and other reasonable dictators?

No, I do not think any of those things will work. And history has proved they have not worked. We need to begin to confront our enemies. And that does not mean we have to launch a military mission into the countries I spoke of. But we have to do more than just adjust tactics in Iraq. If the focus of the next year and a half is simply adjusting tactics within Iraq, it will fail. It will fail. We must go after the regimes that recruit, pay, train, and arm their surrogate militias in Iraq. Again, I am not talking about military confrontation; I am talking about political and economic warfare to bring down the terror regimes in Tehran and their satellite puppet state in Syria. The best way to do that is to work with their own people who want freedom.

I talked about the Iran Freedom and Support Act, but there is much more we need to do. We need to implement it. And we need to use the public diplomacy apparatus we have to motivate and change the hearts and minds. A free Iran will change the world because it will deprive the terrorists of the single greatest source of support and isolate the likes of Hugo Chavez and Kim Jong-il.

Why is a free Iran and a free Iraq so essential? Because neither the United States of America nor any of our Western allies can defeat radical Islamic fascism on our own. We cannot defeat radical Islamic fascism. The only thing we can do is, through democracy-building and through support of moderate Islam, give those who truly seek the true meaning, the true moderate meaning of Islam the opportunity to be successful in suppressing its radical elements. We have to create that environment, and we have not in Iraq because Iran and Syria have not let us.

I remember reading commentaries from so many people talking about that things went well originally in Iraq. It seems like things were going OK, and then, after a year or so, it really started to turn south. Well, immediately after we were there, the Iranians were scared to death of us and dared not play in that sandbox. But they quickly surmised that we were not serious, that we were not going to confront this evil, so they began what we now see.

We need to counter Hugo Chavez. We need to do more to develop closer relationships with the countries in Central and South America, through trade and through diplomatic negotiations. We must fight for the hearts and minds of Central and South America, and we must do so much more deliberately and aggressively than we have. We have to do more to confront North Korea and its threat. That includes options, particularly missile defense. Finally, we have to confront the root cause of all of this, the root cause being oil.

There is one regret I have of not coming back here. It is--and my colleagues know I can be somewhat single-minded--to focus the attention of this body and this country on energy security. It is lunacy, it is suicidal to continue to allow the energy markets at the levels they are right now given the fact that a vast majority of those energy dollars are going to people who want to kill us and destroy everything we believe in. We can no longer play games with our energy security.

I spent a lot of time talking about this war, and I have fought very hard to pass legislation, both the Syrian Accountability Act and the Iran Freedom and Support Act, that will try to hurt our enemies and strengthen our country. I will do my best, after I leave this place, to continue to confront these enemies and to give the United States the opportunity to succeed in this war.

Osama bin Laden said:

In the final phase of the ongoing struggle, the world of the infidels was divided between two superpowers: the United States and the Soviet Union. Now we--

Understand this.

Now we have defeated and destroyed the more difficult and the more dangerous of the two.

Understand what bin Laden is saying. ``We,'' these Islamic fascists--they claim they defeated the Soviet Union, not Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, not Pope John Paul II, but Islamic fascism, the mujahedin in Afghanistan. History will make a plausible case for this assertion that, in fact, they had a lot to do with defeating the Soviet Union. But he continues with one final sentence:

Dealing with the pampered and effeminate Americans will be easy.

You see, they think they understand us. They think they know how to get to America. Open a paper every day and see what their tactic is. Open a paper every day, turn on a television every day, turn on your radio every day, sign on to the Internet every day and see what their tactic is and see how they believe they will defeat us.

I believe we need strong leadership to confront this greatest enemy that we have. The stakes are high, too high not to join together--Democrat, Republican, liberal, conservative, American, European--to confront this dangerous enemy. We must stop them.

Winston Churchill, in June of 1940--I will close with this, for my colleagues who have been patiently waiting--Winston Churchill, in 1940, addressed the British people as Britain stood alone:

What General Weygand called the Battle of France is over. I expect that the Battle of Britain is about to begin.

Upon this battle depends the survival of Christian civilization. Upon it depends our own British life, and the long continuity of our institutions and our Empire. The whole fury and might of the enemy must very soon be turned on us. Hitler knows that he will have to break us in this Island or lose the war. If we can stand up to him, all Europe may be free and the life of the world may move forward into broad, sunlit uplands. But if we fail, then the whole world, including the United States, including all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science. Let us therefore brace ourselves to do our duties, and so bear ourselves that, if the British Empire and its Commonwealth last for a thousand years, men will still say, ``This was their finest hour.''

This is the call of this generation. This is America's hour. This is the hour that we need leadership, Churchillian leadership, who had a keen eye for the enemy and a resolve in spite of the political climate to confront it. I ask my colleagues to stand and make this America's finest hour. I regret that the new Secretary of Defense is not up to the task, in my opinion. I hope others are.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.


Monday, December 11, 2006

Quote Of The Day


"America has this understanding of Africans that plays like National Geographic: a bunch of Negroes with loincloths running around the plain fields of Africa chasing gazelles. Meanwhile, we have Africans and African-Americans, contemporary men, with great stories, great integrity, great heroes and nobody wants to see or hear about those African heroes and those African-American heroes. One day, I will be in a position to play those great human beings on-screen."
- Djimon Hounsou, Academy-Award-nominated actor originally from Benin and who is now a naturalized U.S. citizen, who appears in the new movie "Blood Diamond"

Are white Americans racist?




By Linda Shrieves
Orlando Sentinel

When comedian Michael Richards unleashed a verbal rant at two African-American hecklers in a comedy club recently, he unwittingly sparked a national discussion.

Was Richards, known to many Americans as Seinfeld's quirky Cosmo Kramer, a racist? Did he explode in a fit of stage rage? Or was he telling the truth when he apologized and said he couldn't believe what had come out of his own mouth?

In a country that has shied away from examining racism, Richards' rant and Mel Gibson's drunken, anti-Semitic tirade have led many to wonder: Could there be an inner racist in all of us?

For white Americans, the answer might be "yes." At least that's the theory of Joe Feagin, a Texas A&M sociology professor who has spent decades studying race and racism.

Nearly all white Americans have what Feagin calls "the white racial frame," an extensive set of stereotypes, images and emotions that white people have used since the 1600s to justify holding black people as slaves and later treating black citizens unequally.

And even in an era of political correctness, Feagin says, white Americans cannot escape the socialization. "It's drilled into our heads from the time we're 1-year-olds, by friends, relatives, and, often by the media, by schoolteachers," says Feagin.

Typical of the "white racial frame," says Feagin, is the image of the dangerous black man. "A black corporate executive can be walking down the street at dusk and white people will lock their car doors almost without thinking about it," says Feagin.

Feagin says Americans have learned it's unacceptable to make racist comments in public -- in what he calls a "frontstage" arena. Yet "backstage," in small groups of friends or family members, white people regularly use racist language and tell racist jokes.

"That white racist frame did not die the way public-opinion pollsters have suggested," Feagin says. "It went backstage."

"What happens -- and I suspect this is something like the Richards case -- is frequently whites let the backstage crash into the front stage," Feagin says. That slip, he says, might be caused by alcohol or when a person feels relaxed and loose, even in a mixed crowd.

But not everyone buys that argument.

In Richards' case, says one social psychologist, rage could have fueled a racist spiel -- even from someone who doesn't normally act or feel racist.

"When we're angry, we often say things designed to hurt the person we're angry at," says Clark McCauley of Bryn Mawr College. "We pick the most hurtful thing we can lay our hands on. People have been known to say hurtful things to their spouses. Does that mean that, deep down inside, we hate our spouses?"

Besides, McCauley says that Americans' attitudes toward race have changed dramatically since the 1950s. At that time, more than half of Americans told pollsters that interracial marriage was bad or immoral; today more than 90 percent of Americans do not object to interracial marriage. "Something very important has happened," he says. "The perceived norms have changed in a way that makes this kind of behavior unacceptable in public."

Measuring racism

Kurt Young has heard Americans say that we've moved beyond racism.
But as a black man and a political-science professor, he doesn't buy it.

Just last year, he was driving through a Tampa neighborhood with his father when police pulled him over, allegedly for running a stop sign. Young says he stopped at the sign, yet officers searched his vehicle and delayed him for 20 minutes.

"This is so common, it sounds trivial," says Young, a professor at the University of Central Florida. "It's what everyone calls the 'driving-while-black' phenomenon. It's part of institutional racism."

When Young heard about Richards' comedy-club rant, he wasn't surprised. "His comments fall right in line with the fact that we're still in a society that has, at its very root, matters of race and racism. People say we've moved beyond racism, and I say, 'Tell me the point when racism stopped.' "

Indeed, it has been hard for social scientists to measure racism -- because, until recently, they could rely only on polls and questionnaires. As Americans have moved more toward politically correct speech, it has become harder to know if they're racist or if they're hiding their real views because their opinions aren't publicly acceptable.

That led social psychologists Anthony Greenwald and Mahzarin Banaji to develop a computer test that allows anyone to find out if they're unconsciously prejudiced.

So far, more than 4 million people have taken the online test, known as the Implicit Association Test. Of the 1 million people who've taken a test on racism, about 80 percent show a preference for whites over blacks. (The test is at implicit.harvard.edu.)

Still, Greenwald resists the idea that we are a nation of inner racists -- people who know it's impolite to say racist things but still hold those beliefs.

"The theory that I favor is that most people -- those 80-plus percent who say on surveys they are not prejudiced -- honestly regard themselves as nonprejudiced and that's the way they want to perceive themselves," Greenwald says.

"I'm careful using the word racist," he adds. "All of us have some hidden biases that we may not be aware of."

Besides, says Robert Boyers, a cultural critic and professor at Skidmore College, if you believe that everyone is inherently racist, then no one can be held responsible.

"It's the kind of tempting conclusion that, in a way, lets everyone off the hook," says Boyers. "If everyone is deep inside inherently a racist, if no matter what we learn in school or learn by reading or learn by experience, we continue to think of ourselves as in some way racist, then I have to suppose that we can no longer blame ourselves for anything we say or do. It becomes the way things are, the way we are."

And that, he says, is no prescription for change.


My Reply-

Racism is defined as a belief or doctrine where inherent biological differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, with a corollary that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

I am not sure if many white Americans feel this way but I guess one could with out thinking come to the conclusion that having white skin is an asset. In many ways it would be the same as two guys trying to get a good job and the one with the Ivy League school gets in. If the term racism refers to preference for one's own ethnic group I am guilty particular when choosing who cuts my hair.

When ever I get my hair cut I am very picky because when I was young my neighbor who was white took me to the Hair Cuttery a white salon to get a a hair cut the cut was so bad I freaked out and vowed not to go back to school until my hair returned. From that time up until now I always gave the devils eye to any white person who is about to do my hair.

I do not consider my self racist just cautious and in some way I wonder if such things as racial profiling are more about being cautious then being racist . The killings in Queens where cops who were primarily minority shot 50 bullets into an unarmed men can seem like a classic case of racist cops gone wild. But why would cops of differing skin tones want to kill another minority. Al Sharpton has said that irregardless of the race of the officers the case shows that officers need more training. But what would have happened if all the cops were white would Sharpton and company be talking about better training?

The problem for the left is that they think racism is a product of the ignorant and through education can be dismantled. The facts show over and over that no government can eradicate hate no more than it can force its citizen's to love each other.

The only thing government can do it is create an environment where opportunity and cooperation between the races flourish. If some one hates you the only thing government can do is protect you from that person putting his or her hands on you.

Whether it be blacks in Rwanda killing each other over tribal distinctions or Arab Sudanese killing black Sudanese when people detect a difference in something some will fear it while others will embrace it.

Some argue that this debate goes back to our evolutionary days where tribal instincts helped us to survive. If this is the case it may be that racism is a left over survival tool from the dawn of time.


http://www.orlandosentinel.com/features/lifestyle/orl-innerracist06dec04,0,2903554.story?track=mostemailedlink

Friday, December 08, 2006

Dr.Martin Luther Kings ..."Letter to an Anti Semite"



Update:Welcome Atlas_Shrugs Readers


“Letter to an Anti-Zionist Friend"

“This I Believe: Selections from the Writings of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.” (NY: 1971), pp. 234-235.


". . . You declare, my friend, that you do not hate the Jews, you are merely 'anti-Zionist.' And I say, let the truth ring forth from the high mountain tops, let it echo through the valleys of God's green earth: When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews--this is God's own truth.

Anti-Semitism, the hatred of the Jewish people, has been and remains a blot on the soul of mankind. In this we are in full agreement. So know also this: anti-Zionist is inherently anti-Semitic, and ever will be so.

Why ? Because Zionism is nothing less than the dream and ideal of the Jewish people returning to live in their own land.

The Jewish people, the Scriptures tell us, once enjoyed a flourishing Commonwealth in the Holy Land. From this they were expelled by the Roman tyrant, the same Romans who cruelly murdered Our Lord. Driven from their homeland, their nation in ashes, forced to wander the globe, the Jewish people time and again suffered the lash of whichever tyrant happened to rule over them.

The Negro people, my friend, know what it is to suffer the torment of tyranny under rulers not of our choosing. Our brothers in Africa have begged, pleaded, requested--DEMANDED the recognition and realization of our inborn right to live in peace under our own sovereignty in our own country.

How easy it should be, for anyone who holds dear this inalienable right of all mankind, to understand and support the right of the Jewish People to live in their ancient Land of Israel. All men of good will exult in the fulfillment of God's promise, that his People should return in joy to rebuild their plundered land.

This is Zionism, nothing more, nothing less.

If you believe the Jewish people deserve to have an independent state, then you are a Zionist. It’s that easy.

Zionism is not a dirty word. It is a credo which reinforces the legitimate right of the Jewish people to self-determination."

You don’t have to be a Jew to be a Zionist, the same way you don’t have to be a woman to be a feminist, or a black person to believe in equal rights for blacks.

Being a Zionist does not mean that you believe Israel is perfect or makes no mistakes. You can support Palestinian national aspiration, and still be a Zionist. As a Zionist, you can disagree with Israel’s policies, you can criticize her government. You can speak out against policies, and demonstrate against them.
But you cannot take away her right to exist as a state for the Jewish people.

"And what is anti-Zionist? It is the denial to the Jewish people of a fundamental right that we justly claim for the people of Africa and freely accord all other nations of the Globe. It is discrimination against Jews, my friend, because they are Jews. In short, it is anti-Semitism.

The anti-Semite rejoices at any opportunity to vent his malice. The times have made it unpopular, in the West, to proclaim openly a hatred of the Jews. This being the case, the anti-Semite must constantly seek new forms and forums for his poison. How he must revel in the new masquerade! He does not hate the Jews, he is just 'anti-Zionist'!"

The Jewish people is one of the most ancient peoples in the history of humanity still surviving today.

For over 3000 years, since Biblical times, the Jewish people have kept all the elements which define them as a people: culture, tradition, religion, language, and connection to their land.

On 1948, the Jewish people became, once again, a sovereign nation in their home, the land that they were promised thousands of years ago, and in which they had a continuous presence since then.

The French people have an independent state.

The Japanese people have an independent state.

The Arab people have 22 independent states.

The Jewish people, who had sovereignty before any of these people, certainly deserve to have an independent state of their own. This is Zionism!

-Martin

No, the Cops Didn’t Murder Sean Bell

"No, the Cops Didn’t Murder Sean Bell"

By Heather Mac Donald

And here’s what decent black advocates would say.

4 December 2006

New York’s anti-cop forces have roared back to life, thanks to a fatal police shooting of an unarmed man a week ago. The press is once again fawning over Al Sharpton, Herbert Daughtry, Charles Barron, and sundry other hate-mongers in and out of city government as they accuse the police of widespread mistreatment of blacks and issue barely veiled threats of riots if they do not get “justice.”

The allegation that last weekend’s shooting was racially motivated is preposterous. A group of undercover officers working in a gun- and drug-plagued strip joint in Queens had good reason to believe that a party leaving the club was armed and about to shoot an adversary. When one of the undercovers identified himself as an officer, the car holding the party twice tried to run him down. The officer started firing while yelling to the car’s occupants: “Let me see your hands.” His colleagues, believing they were under attack, fired as well, eventually shooting off 50 rounds and killing the driver, Sean Bell. No gun was found in the car, but witnesses and video footage confirm that a fourth man in the party fled the scene once the altercation began. Bell and the other men with him all had been arrested for illegal possession of guns in the past; one of Bell’s companions that night, Joseph Guzman, had spent considerable time in prison, including for an armed robbery in which he shot at his victim.

Nothing in these facts suggests that racial animus lay behind the incident. (Though this detail should be irrelevant, the undercover team was racially mixed, and the officer who fired the first shot was black.) But even more preposterous than the assertion of such animus is the claim by New York’s self-appointed minority advocates that the well-being of the minority community is what motivates them. If it were, here are seven things that you would have heard them say years ago:

1. “Stop the killing!” Since 1993, 11,353 people have been murdered in New York City. The large majority of victims and perpetrators have been black. Not a single one of those black-on-black killings has prompted protest or demonstrations from the city’s black advocates. Sharpton, Barron, et al. are happy to let thousands of black victims get mowed down by thugs without so much as a whispered call for “peace” or “justice”; it’s only when a police officer, trying to protect the public, makes a good faith mistake in a moment of intense pressure that they rise as vindicators of black life. (As for caring about slain police officers, forget about it. Sixteen cops—including several black policemen—have been killed since 1999, not one of whom elicited a public demonstration of condolence from the race hustlers.)

If the city’s black advocates paid even a tiny fraction of the attention they pay to shootings by criminals as they pay to shootings by police, they could change the face of the city. If demonstrators gathered outside the jail cell of every rapist and teen stick-up thug, cameras in tow, to shame them for their attacks on law-abiding minority residents, they could deglamorize the gangsta life. Think you’ll find Sharpton or Barron patrolling with the police in dark housing project stairways, trying to protect residents from predators? Not a chance. Among the crimes committed in minority communities since last week’s police shooting of Sean Bell there has been a 26-year-old man fatally shot in the Bronx; another man hit by stray bullets; a sandwich shop in Brownsville robbed by thugs who fired a gun; and three elderly men robbed at knifepoint by a parolee in Queens. Those minority victims who survived will have to rely on the police and the courts, not the race “advocates,” for vindication.

2. “Police killings of innocent civilians—each one of them a horror—are nonetheless rare.” The instances of an officer shooting an innocent, unarmed victim are so unusual that they can be counted on one’s fingers. Last year, of the nine suspects fatally shot by the police, two had just fired at a police officer, three were getting ready to fire, two had tried to stab an officer, and two were physically attacking an officer. Far more frequent are the times when the NYPD refrains from using force though clearly authorized to do so. So far this year, officers have been fired upon four times, without returning fire. In 2005, there were five such incidents. And the NYPD apprehended 3,428 armed felons this year, 15 percent more than last year. Each arrest of a gun-toting thug involves the potential for the use of deadly force, yet is almost always carried out peacefully.

The Department has dramatically driven down the rate of all police shootings—justified and not—over the decades (in 1973, there were 1.82 fatal police shootings per 1,000 officers; in 2005, there were 0.25 such shootings per 1,000 officers, bringing the absolute number of police shootings down from 54 in 1973 to nine in 2005). The NYPD’s per capita rate of shootings is lower than many big city departments.

Yet New York Times columnist Bob Herbert charges the police with an unbroken pattern of “blowing away innocent individuals with impunity.” The “community,” he wrote on November 30, “which is sick of these killings, is simmering,” What are “these killings,” about which the “community” is simmering? Herbert reaches back over three decades and adduces five prior to the recent shooting of Sean Bell. Each was a disaster that provoked the NYPD to scrutinize its tactics. But the number of innocent bystanders killed by criminal thugs in New York dwarfs the number of innocents killed by the police. Sharpton recently said that the minority community has to fear police officers as much as robbers. This is a groundless charge. What is true is that stoking the myth that the police are a threat to blacks harms the minority community by inflaming anti-cop sentiment and retarding community cooperation in the fight against crime in inner-city neighborhoods.

3. “The police work every day to save lives.” If New York City murders had remained at their early 1990s highs, instead of dropping from 1,927 killings in 1993 to 540 in 2005, 13,698 more people—most of them black and Hispanic—would have been dead by last year. They are alive today thanks to the relentless efforts of the NYPD to bring the same level of safety to poor minority neighborhoods as to Greenwich Village and the Upper East Side.

The undercover officers who killed Sean Bell over the weekend were working the strip club in Queens where the incident occurred at 4 AM because of its record of illegal guns and drug sales. Their intentions that night were to protect the residents of Jamaica and the occupants of the club from violence; that they ended up killing an unarmed man is undoubtedly a nightmare for them almost as horrific as it is for the victim’s family.

It may turn out that the officers failed to follow departmental procedures during the incident (though the NYPD’s rule against firing at cars that are trying to run an officer over seems highly unrealistic). If so, the city will hold them accountable. The criminal justice system may even find them criminally liable. But there is absolutely no evidence that racial hatred lay behind either the officers’ presence at the club or their behavior once there—contrary to the outrageous slander of New York City Councilman Al Vann, who called the shooting of Bell and other police shootings the product of “a discriminatory mind, a prejudiced mind,” adding, “We have to admit [that] the problem is . . . institutional racism.”

A New York Times reporter, Cara Buckley, coyly echoed this inflammatory charge on Wednesday. In referring to the undercover officer who fired the first shots at the car, she says: “The officer’s fear, if that was what motivated him, was unfounded” (emphasis added). We will leave aside the spurious judgment that just because no gun was ultimately found on the car’s occupants, the officer’s fear of a gun was “unfounded.” The officer, after all, had heard Sean Bell say, “Let’s fuck him up,” and Bell’s friend, Joseph Guzman, respond, “Yo, get my gun.” That officer was then the target of an oncoming vehicle driven by Bell. The most offensive part of Buckley’s statement, though, is her suggestion that the officer might have been motivated by something other than fear—and what else could that be but racism or some kind of violent animus?

The New York Times, Al Vann, and other City Council hotheads such as Helen Foster notwithstanding, someone who believes that black lives are worth less than white lives is not going to put his own life at risk working in dangerous environments trying to get guns away from criminals.

4. “If you witnessed a crime, help the authorities solve it.” The police could probably lock away just about every dangerous thug roaming the streets if they got more cooperation from witnesses and people with knowledge of the crime. Instead, they often encounter a wall of hostile silence in minority communities. Bystanders sometimes deliberately block officers chasing a criminal. The stigma against helping the police—referred to derogatorily as “snitching”—is pervasive. “If you’re a snitch, people want to kill you,” a teen robber in a Brooklyn crime rehabilitation program that I observed this spring explained. Helping the police is seen as helping the enemy, defined in racial terms. Even black officers are part of the hated white establishment. “Black cops, I disrespect them. They sucking the white man,” asserted another juvenile delinquent in the Crown Heights rehab program.

Many law-abiding residents of crime-ridden neighborhoods buck this self-defeating social norm. They attend police-community council meetings in their local precinct month after month, learning about police initiatives, and they report anonymously on drug deals and vice hot spots. They are the eyes and ears of the department, and without their help, the NYPD might not have achieved the unmatched crime drop of the last decade. It would be astounding if any of the anti-police activists leading protests about the Sean Bell shooting had ever attended a precinct community meeting or offered to help the police solve crimes. Presumably, they have more important things to do than work to improve the quality of life in minority neighborhoods. Let the police take care of that. But even if the anti-cop activists can’t be bothered to give a few hours a month to fight crime, they could at least use their bully pulpit to call on others to share what they know about criminals and to help get violent offenders off the street before they injure more people and property. Instead, their opportunistic cop-bashing only increases the hatred of the police and the stigma against cooperating with them. As a result, more lives will be taken by cop-eluding barbarians.

5. “The NYPD and the criminal justice system investigate every police shooting with profound seriousness; they will not rest until the facts are uncovered and justice done.” The premise of the current grandstanding by “minority advocates” is that the authorities would shrug off the recent shooting without heat from the street. One thinks of the rooster in the fable, who believes that his crowing raises the sun. “Business will not go on as usual until we get justice for Sean Bell,” Sharpton said on Wednesday. It is not Sharpton and his cronies who are getting justice for Bell, however. The street agitators could all go home (sometimes, as in the case of Sharpton, to suburbia) and wait quietly for a resolution, and the system would proceed just as diligently to assign fault if fault was present and to hold any wrongdoers accountable.

Other publicity-hungry politicians are just as desperate to add their voices to the post-shooting hue and cry. New York Senators Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton issued a joint statement on Wednesday: “It is of the utmost importance that the investigating authorities, led by the Queens district attorney, conduct an aggressive, impartial investigation to ferret out the facts.” What do they think would have happened without this self-righteous piece of boilerplate? That the “investigating authorities” would have conducted a biased, half-hearted investigation?

Every time the anti-police lobby issues superfluous demands for a “full investigation” and threats of violence if “justice” is not done, they send the destructive message that the police are indifferent to the loss of life. Or worse: “I’m not asking my people to do anything passive anymore,” said City Councilman Charles Barron. “Don’t ask us to ask our people to be peaceful while they are being murdered. We’re not the only ones that can bleed.”

6. “Police officers make mistakes; tragically, those mistakes are sometimes deadly.” Perhaps Al Sharpton, Charles Barron, and Jesse Jackson have never made an error of judgment, except for Tawana Brawley and such like. Perhaps, too—though this is truly unlikely—they have had to confront the possibility that they are facing someone about to shoot them and in a split-second to decide whether to shoot first. Perhaps in such circumstances, they would never ever make the wrong decision. If so, perhaps they are justified in strutting around like beings of superhuman prescience and infallibility.

But most police officers are like other human beings: they do make mistakes. And because they are carrying lethal weapons, in order to counter the illegal firepower packed by lowlifes, very occasionally those mistakes take an innocent life. The Police Department works incessantly to make sure that its officers never make a fatal error. It tries to drill into officers reflexes that will guard against wrong split-second judgments. It constantly reviews its training and official procedures to improve those reflexes. But out in the field, even the best training can prove inadequate to the pressure and confusion of a possibly deadly encounter.

This is not to say that the public and elected officials should automatically excuse every police shooting—which they are obviously far from doing. But to presume that every mistaken shooting represents a system-wide failure is inaccurate and unrealistic. The New York Times darkly commands: “[T]he Police Department must . . . confront the fact that a disaster that everyone swore to prevent seven years ago has repeated itself in Queens.” But because cops are humans and therefore fallible, it is impossible to prevent every wrongful shooting—without emasculating the police entirely. The New York Times has itself made a few mistakes over the last seven years; perhaps it, too, needs to confront its persistent fallibility.

7. “The police concentrate their efforts in minority communities because that is where the crime is.” Race hustlers accuse the police of “racially profiling” and targeting minorities for unjustified police action. After showing up in New York for his time in the Sean Bell spotlight, Jesse Jackson announced: “Our criminal-justice system has broken down for black Americans and young black males. We’ve marched and marched, bled too profusely, and died too young. We must draw a line in the sand and fight back.”

Memo to Jackson: The police have a disproportionate number of interactions with blacks because blacks are committing a disproportionate number of crimes. That fact comes from the testimony of the victims of those crimes, themselves largely black, not from the police. In New York City, blacks committed 62 percent of all murders, rapes, robberies, and assaults from 1998 to 2000, according to victim and witness identification, even though they make up only 25 percent of the city’s population. Whites committed 8 percent of those crimes over that period, though they are 28 percent of New York residents. These proportions have been stable for years and remain so today. It’s not the “criminal-justice system” that has broken down for young black males; it’s families and other sources of cultural support. Changing the subject and blaming the police just perpetuates the problem.

The furor over the Sean Bell shooting shows no sign of abating; if anything, the specious racial rhetoric is becoming more ugly and dangerous. To the extent that the exploitation of this tragic event makes the police think twice about engaging with possible criminals or turn a blind eye to crime in the ghetto (as was once the case), the most direct victims will be the hundreds of thousands of innocent, upstanding minority New Yorkers.

http://www.city-journal.org/html/eon2006-12-04hm.html

"Rev. Moon and the black clergy"



by Delroy Alexander and Margaret Ramirez ("Chicago Tribune," November 5, 2006)

Chicago, USA - Central United Community Church stands on Chicago's South Side as a storefront sanctuary, serving the needy and spiritually hungry who pass through its doors. The modest church has worn wooden pews and a fiery pastor preaching from a pulpit, but missing is Christianity's most powerful symbol: the cross.

Rev. Joseph McAfee took down the cross and buried it, inspired by the teachings of Rev. Sun Myung Moon, the controversial Korean spiritual leader. "If you stop at the cross, you're just preaching pain," said McAfee, who keeps an autographed picture of the Unification Church founder in his office.

The cross may be a symbol of pain to McAfee, but its removal from his church is emblematic of something more--a growing and potent alliance between Moon and black religious leaders across the country.

The unlikely partnership, known as the American Clergy Leadership Conference (ACLC), represents the latest chapter in Moon's remarkable evolution from convicted felon and alleged cult leader to influential religious and political figure with ties to Rev. Jerry Falwell and former President George H.W. Bush.

Nationwide, organizers say, thousands of pastors attend monthly prayer breakfasts where they praise Moon and his wife as "Father and Mother Moon." Many have taken expenses-paid overseas trips, including one under way in Japan, Korea and Europe.

And dozens of Chicago-area ministers such as McAfee either have taken down their crosses or participated in those ceremonies. Moon's people, in fact, see Chicago as the model for national growth of the religious alliance.

Moon's outreach to largely Baptist and Pentecostal clergy thrives despite a doctrine that states he is the Second Coming of the Messiah and that Jesus Christ failed to complete the mission God sent him to do.

The ACLC attracts primarily black clergy even though Moon envisions creating a new human family where his interracial wedding ceremonies eventually will produce a single race that is all "yellow."

As Moon put it in a 1991 sermon: "Little by little the color of black people will gradually become lighter."

While the conference is promoted as a bridge between races and faiths, it also has become a marriage of convenience for Moon and African-American religious leaders.

For the black pastors, the benefits include prestige, a powerful ally and gifts, including watches worth $12,000. For Moon, the alliance brings credibility in poor urban communities, a new audience for his theology and political leverage.

"The assumption is that he's just doing it to curry favor and buy credibility," said Rev. Phillip Schanker, spokesman for the Unification Church, formally known as the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification. "That's not what I've seen."

Although some African-American pastors courted by Moon's followers contend the network is being manipulated to advance his agenda, those closer to the movement defend their thinking--even if they don't declare Moon as the Second Coming.

"No. I already have a messiah. That's Jesus Christ," McAfee said. "I don't need another messiah. But I do need a friend."

In the beginning

The ACLC was born on a Korean mountaintop in May 2000. Moon invited the 120 founding members on an expenses-paid trip where he christened the pastors, presented each with a diamond-studded watch and said they were on a "mission to become one with the True Parents," as Moon and his wife are known in the Unification Church.

Those on the trip included two men who are leaders of the ACLC in Chicago, Rev. T.L. Barrett Jr. and Rev. A. Harold White. With their help, the leadership conference has become Moon's main vehicle in the black community to help unite the world's religions under his philosophy of Godism--in effect, a worldwide theocracy.

"The wall between church and state as it's understood now would not be there," Schanker said.

To finance his grand vision, Moon and his followers have developed a sprawling business empire that includes The New Yorker Hotel, The Washington Times and a seafood conglomerate, True World Group Inc., that supplies sushi-grade fish to thousands of restaurants in the U.S.

In launching the ACLC, Moon has spent several million dollars, according to the Unification Church.

Moon's unorthodox theology is spelled out in the sacred text of the Unification Church, the Divine Principle. Under Moon's interpretation of the Bible, Jesus failed to complete God's mission for him, to marry and create perfect children.

Moon, 86, also teaches that he and his second wife are the "True Parents" of a new spiritual lineage born without original sin.

The ultimate purpose of Moon's famous mass weddings is to carry out his vision of a world in which most people will have Asian blood. "The Pacific era will come," Moon said in a 1993 speech. "The Asian culture and people will become more dominant."

In explaining Moon's philosophy about race, Schanker wrote in an e-mail: "The emphasis is not on DILUTING the races, per se, but the TRANSCENDING of race."

Moon's controversial views don't faze his supporters in the African-American religious community.

"If we could live under the hard oppressive rule of the white man, certainly I have no problem with the Koreans," said Washington, D.C.-based pastor Bishop C. Phillip Johnson. "If God so chooses to raise them up to be the lead and to bring about real true religious and racial harmony, then I have no problem following him."

Some African-American pastors find take-down-the-cross ceremonies meaningful because of this country's history of racism and brutality.

McAfee, who has traveled on Moon's trips but has not received a watch, equated the image of Jesus on the cross to photos of African-American men being lynched in the last century.

"I know we need to teach about slavery. We need to know about that. But do we have to show those pictures of black men hanging from trees?" asked McAfee, who took down the cross Easter weekend in 2003.

"Why would you want to come to church every Sunday and look at a dead man killed on a piece of wood?"

Moon respects the cross but believes it "has become a symbol throughout history of intolerance for Jews and Muslims," Schanker said.

Persuading ACLC pastors to act on such beliefs is evidence of how Moon's movement has matured since he was incarcerated in the early 1980s after a tax-fraud conviction.

At the time, the Unification Church was likened to a cult, in part because it built large compounds where members lived together. Since then, Moon's followers have abandoned mass-conversion efforts and living in communes in favor of churches whose members reside in their own homes.

"The movement has normalized and lost the rough edges that made many families fearful for adult kids being involved," said Anson Shupe, a sociology professor at Indiana University-Purdue University who has studied Moon for nearly three decades. "Nobody even bothers to accuse Moon of brainwashing anymore."

Despite past controversies, Moon and his followers have forged ties to religious and political leaders across the spectrum.

A Moon-affiliated group helped fund Minister Louis Farrakhan's Million Family March. Moon's supporters helped to financially bail out Jerry Falwell's Liberty University several years ago, and the evangelist attended Moon-sponsored events through the mid 1990s.

Moon's ties to Bush, the former president, span years and continents.

The former U.S. president and his wife, Barbara, have toured with Moon and spoken at several events sponsored by the Women's Federation for World Peace, which is headed by Moon's wife, Hak Ja Han Moon.

Of that event in 1996, the Washington Post wrote at the time: "The group would not disclose how much it paid Bush and his wife, nor would the former president reveal his fee, but estimates ran as high as $1 million for his six appearances with the group here."

In 2004, Bush sent a videotaped message welcoming Moon and other guests to the ACLC-sponsored Common Legacy Breakfast Summit, held in the Wardman Park Marriott Hotel in Washington. He said: "Barbara and I, and certainly our President, have the same beliefs you do, that strong families, volunteer service and faith-based solutions can help answer many, if not most, of the challenges we face in our communities."

Last year, a Moon-affiliated group gave $1 million to a Hurricane Katrina relief fund set up by the former president's Points of Light Foundation.

This ability to establish a broad array of alliances has helped to advance Moon's conservative social views that ACLC members share.

In Massachusetts, the first state in the nation to legalize same-sex marriage, ACLC pastors and their church members took part last November in demonstrations favoring an amendment to the state constitution to ban such unions. They collected thousands of signatures, the first step to getting the measure on the 2008 ballot.

Moon's followers also have been at the forefront of abstinence education. Free Teens USA, a non-profit run by Unification member Richard Panzer, received $800,000 last year through the Department of Health and Human Services' faith-based initiatives program.

Moon's face in Chicago

In the black community, the ACLC has become the most prominent example of Moon's inroads into the American mainstream.

At the conference's monthly Chicago prayer breakfast in September, dozens of mostly black pastors bowed their heads as a Japanese soprano performed a haunting rendition of "Amazing Grace." After that serene opening, the gathering ended with a rousing sermon and a burst of applause and praise for "Father Moon."

Among the speakers was Barrett, pastor of one of Chicago's most prominent black Pentecostal churches, Life Center Church of God in Christ.

Like many conference pastors, Barrett became familiar with the Moon movement when Unification members visited his church, lavishing him with flowers and affection. From there, they invited Barrett, a charismatic preacher and singer, to speak at a Moon-affiliated event in Chicago.

He first met Moon in 1993 and later joined Moon and his wife on speaking tours as well as expenses-paid trips to Korea and Israel. In 2000, Barrett attended Moon's birthday celebration in Seoul, where the church leader gave Barrett a Christian Bernard watch valued at $250,000.

His close personal bond with Moon, though, has come with a price: The Church of God in Christ leadership publicly chastised Barrett for his ties to the religious leader.

Many of his congregants, by contrast, say they have no problem with his association with Moon. "I have a lot of faith in Pastor Barrett," Sondra Smith said after a recent Sunday service. "I've heard him say how he respects Rev. Moon, and that's OK with me. If he likes him, then so do I."

Barrett, who has been paid to speak alongside Moon at rallies and on tours, remains unapologetic about his relationship with Moon and his role in helping to develop the ACLC. He said he feels a "personal debt of gratitude" toward Moon, who helped him reconcile with his wife after almost a decade apart.

Rev. Levy Daugherty, ACLC executive director, estimated that 1,200 Chicago-area religious leaders are members of