The title is a take-off on Michael Moore's highly successful documentary, but in this case the target is Iran..and then Syria, and then...?
Under the just announced executive order #13382, U.S. authorities will be able to freeze the assets of, and prohibit any U.S. citizen or organization, from doing business with Iran.
This would certainly be considered an act of war if this had been done to the U.S. by another sovereign country. One newspaper reported it this way: http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1025/p99s01-duts.htm
Not surprisingly, Sen. Joseph Lieberman is quoted as being ecstatic at this further escalation and provocation of war with Iran. Lieberman is an Israeli proxy, whose main concern is the destruction of any country who Israel deems to be a threat to it's security. The certain destructive impact of war with Iran on our own country and it's economy, is of little concern to him, just as the horrific human and economic losses already caused by our ongoing war on Iraq, is of no consequence to him, and is still supported by him.
Although I'm very sorry that Al Gore was robbed of the presidency in 2000, on the other hand, in a way, I'm glad that he lost. Had he won, we would have had Joseph Lieberman as our vice-president, and if something unfortunate happened to Gore, Lieberman would have become president. Can you imagine where we would be right now if he were president??? IMHO, it would be much worse than it has been with Bush, and we probably would have already been at war with Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and any other perceived enemy of Israel.
The justification for this latest sanction and warmongering, is Iran's alleged nuclear ambitions and it's threat to the region. Few, besides me, are brave enough to point out, that Israel has 200+ nuclear weapons in it's arsenal, and is certainly more of a threat to the region than any of it's neighbors - (they bombed Iraq's facilities in 1982, Lebanon a few years ago, and Syria a few months ago). And even if they were not an immediate threat to their neighbors, they are more than capably equipped to defend themselves if attacked. No one is asking them to get rid of their arsenal, so why is Iran being told not to develop theirs? This double-standard when it comes to Israel, is so blatant and accepted universally, that it would be laughable, if it was not so deadly serious.
Israel's supporters would label my views as being anti-semitic, as a means of denying the facts and truth of this double-standard. They have very effectively used this canard on virtually anyone, in and out of our government, who would dare to speak the truth about what's going on. It's time to lose this fear of speaking the truth, because if we don't, we will be soon rolling to war with other sovereign countries, on trumped-up charges, on behalf of the war profiteers and on behalf of Israel.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Saturday, October 20, 2007
"Come On People....."
So starts the title of the latest missive in the form of a book, by Bill Cosby and his enabler, Dr. Alvin Poussaint. Their blame-the-victim worldview, is on full display on it's pages. So much so, that 'Meet The Press' and 'Larry King' deemed it worthy of devoting a full hour of their program to highlight and publicize it's relentless black-bashing and overly-broad, generalizations.
The problems of misplaced values, predatory neighborhood violence, alcohol and drug addictions, single parent households, etc., are commonplace in the 'lower classes' of all racial groups, whether they be black, white, Latino, Asian, or native American. But this book makes it seem as those ills and problems, are exclusively those of 'lower class' blacks and no other groups. The dominant society wants to believe it is self-inflicted, and therefore blacks are not the victims of the well-documented history of white racial intolerance and injustices. This is crucial to what whites want to believe about themselves, because the black lower classes are a constant reminder of the legacy of slavery and it's fruits, that continue to prick their consciences.
Black bashing, is red-meat to the most right-wing foes of African Americans, and the corporate media is in full-scale slurp as it slobbers up the tidbits in this book, that absolves them and lets them off the hook by blaming the alleged 'victimhood' mentality of lower-class blacks, for their condition.
Within the African American community exists elements (like Cosby) which constantly points to the 'dysfunctionality' of the black underclass as a way to both distinguish themselves from such behavior, and to attack the shortcomings of the black poor as their own fault and no one else's. At the core of the black elite’s hatred for the behavior of the black underclass, is their ultimate fear of being equated with all things 'black'. The black elite cannot stand the possibility of being lumped together with those who they disdain, and who might threaten their status of being 'ascended' beyond the common plight of those who are not likely to rise above their surroundings.
One reviewer correctly observed, "Cosby makes a Grand Canyon size leap to paint a half-truth, skewed, picture of the plight of poor blacks and the reasons and then prescriptions for their plight. This is all based on the assumption that they are crime-prone, education despising, ebonics speaking, unwed baby making machines."
Not only does he take the worst behaviors of blacks (that are also true of a minority of all ethnic groups) and implies that it is exclusively a black dysfunction, but he makes it racially based rather than a function of the systemic racism that has been ongoing since slavery. He pays scant attention to the context for this dysfunction, and instead leaps headlong in making and perpetuating dangerous stereotypes, that would make the most ardent racist, proud. The facts of educational disparities, lack of living wage jobs because they have been outsourced, a biased criminal justice system etc., are hardly mentioned as context for the damning statistics that are offered as proof of their inferiority and victimhood mentality.
To say that we have overcome systemic racism before, and can do so now, is stating the obvious which no one disagrees with. But to say that they have to "clean themselves up first, before complaining about societal racism", displays an appalling lack of ignorance or willfully ignoring the principal of personal growth and affirmation through struggle in common with others. It's the old 'pulling up by the bootstrap' theory that Cosby fancies he has already done, using his wealth as proof of how well it works.
Biased corporate decisions and failed public policies, are the main villains that should be addressed as a first step in reversing the alarming statistics that are being used to demonize the black poor. But the political will and activism that is required to accomplish this, is urged by Cosby to be put on the back burner until the ghetto cleanses itself. In his mind it is just as simple as saying no (Nancy Reagan would be so proud that her simplistic bromide has been adopted by Cosby).
I found most of the book and particularly the first chapter, to be full of simplistic, inane homilies and condescending rhetoric. One of the worst examples is;
"We're not saying there is no discrimination or racial profiling today, but there is less than there was in 1950. These are not ‘political' criminals. These are people selling drugs, stealing, or shooting their buddies over trivia."
This is absolute nonsense when you consider the 'politics' of allowing an unlimited number of liquor stores in black communities, the 3-strike laws, the swat-team swoops in which innocents are regularly assaulted, the massive infusion of drugs and guns into the ghettos of our nation - all point to 'political' racial targeting on a scale that was unimaginable in the 1950s.
Cosby's broad generalizations about the unworthy, immoral, black poor, fills this book in chapter after chapter and verse after verse. And not once did I see any mention about his being charged with numerous sexual assaults on women, and his own extra-marital child who came forward recently - how moral is his own conduct????
The old saying about not throwing stones while living in a glass house, was never more true than in this case. I would change the title of this book to - "Come on Cosby, you've forgotten about your own misdeeds, and that some need more patience and help than others, and that the measure of a societies humanity, is how they care for and treat the poorest ones among them."
Not only does this book do nothing to inspire and motivate underachieving blacks to move forward and improve their lives, but it further demoralizes the majority of the poor who are trying so hard against the overwhelming odds stacked against them. It also says to the majority community as well as to government agencies and social service providers, that poor blacks are unworthy of their affirmative help, resources or opportunities, because their condition is self-inflicted and therefore their own fault.
It's becoming clearer that Cosby is either a card-carrying member of the Repugnant party which delights in this kind of 'truth-telling' at the expense of blacks, or he has drunk their poisonous kool-aid and has sold his soul for the wealth they have allowed him to have. Either way, Cosby has been 'weighed in the balances and found wanting'.
The problems of misplaced values, predatory neighborhood violence, alcohol and drug addictions, single parent households, etc., are commonplace in the 'lower classes' of all racial groups, whether they be black, white, Latino, Asian, or native American. But this book makes it seem as those ills and problems, are exclusively those of 'lower class' blacks and no other groups. The dominant society wants to believe it is self-inflicted, and therefore blacks are not the victims of the well-documented history of white racial intolerance and injustices. This is crucial to what whites want to believe about themselves, because the black lower classes are a constant reminder of the legacy of slavery and it's fruits, that continue to prick their consciences.
Black bashing, is red-meat to the most right-wing foes of African Americans, and the corporate media is in full-scale slurp as it slobbers up the tidbits in this book, that absolves them and lets them off the hook by blaming the alleged 'victimhood' mentality of lower-class blacks, for their condition.
Within the African American community exists elements (like Cosby) which constantly points to the 'dysfunctionality' of the black underclass as a way to both distinguish themselves from such behavior, and to attack the shortcomings of the black poor as their own fault and no one else's. At the core of the black elite’s hatred for the behavior of the black underclass, is their ultimate fear of being equated with all things 'black'. The black elite cannot stand the possibility of being lumped together with those who they disdain, and who might threaten their status of being 'ascended' beyond the common plight of those who are not likely to rise above their surroundings.
One reviewer correctly observed, "Cosby makes a Grand Canyon size leap to paint a half-truth, skewed, picture of the plight of poor blacks and the reasons and then prescriptions for their plight. This is all based on the assumption that they are crime-prone, education despising, ebonics speaking, unwed baby making machines."
Not only does he take the worst behaviors of blacks (that are also true of a minority of all ethnic groups) and implies that it is exclusively a black dysfunction, but he makes it racially based rather than a function of the systemic racism that has been ongoing since slavery. He pays scant attention to the context for this dysfunction, and instead leaps headlong in making and perpetuating dangerous stereotypes, that would make the most ardent racist, proud. The facts of educational disparities, lack of living wage jobs because they have been outsourced, a biased criminal justice system etc., are hardly mentioned as context for the damning statistics that are offered as proof of their inferiority and victimhood mentality.
To say that we have overcome systemic racism before, and can do so now, is stating the obvious which no one disagrees with. But to say that they have to "clean themselves up first, before complaining about societal racism", displays an appalling lack of ignorance or willfully ignoring the principal of personal growth and affirmation through struggle in common with others. It's the old 'pulling up by the bootstrap' theory that Cosby fancies he has already done, using his wealth as proof of how well it works.
Biased corporate decisions and failed public policies, are the main villains that should be addressed as a first step in reversing the alarming statistics that are being used to demonize the black poor. But the political will and activism that is required to accomplish this, is urged by Cosby to be put on the back burner until the ghetto cleanses itself. In his mind it is just as simple as saying no (Nancy Reagan would be so proud that her simplistic bromide has been adopted by Cosby).
I found most of the book and particularly the first chapter, to be full of simplistic, inane homilies and condescending rhetoric. One of the worst examples is;
"We're not saying there is no discrimination or racial profiling today, but there is less than there was in 1950. These are not ‘political' criminals. These are people selling drugs, stealing, or shooting their buddies over trivia."
This is absolute nonsense when you consider the 'politics' of allowing an unlimited number of liquor stores in black communities, the 3-strike laws, the swat-team swoops in which innocents are regularly assaulted, the massive infusion of drugs and guns into the ghettos of our nation - all point to 'political' racial targeting on a scale that was unimaginable in the 1950s.
Cosby's broad generalizations about the unworthy, immoral, black poor, fills this book in chapter after chapter and verse after verse. And not once did I see any mention about his being charged with numerous sexual assaults on women, and his own extra-marital child who came forward recently - how moral is his own conduct????
The old saying about not throwing stones while living in a glass house, was never more true than in this case. I would change the title of this book to - "Come on Cosby, you've forgotten about your own misdeeds, and that some need more patience and help than others, and that the measure of a societies humanity, is how they care for and treat the poorest ones among them."
Not only does this book do nothing to inspire and motivate underachieving blacks to move forward and improve their lives, but it further demoralizes the majority of the poor who are trying so hard against the overwhelming odds stacked against them. It also says to the majority community as well as to government agencies and social service providers, that poor blacks are unworthy of their affirmative help, resources or opportunities, because their condition is self-inflicted and therefore their own fault.
It's becoming clearer that Cosby is either a card-carrying member of the Repugnant party which delights in this kind of 'truth-telling' at the expense of blacks, or he has drunk their poisonous kool-aid and has sold his soul for the wealth they have allowed him to have. Either way, Cosby has been 'weighed in the balances and found wanting'.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Visible or Invisible?
What is important for Jerald and all of us to understand, is that no man is an island, and we depend on each other, particularly in a white-dominated environment. That means we sacrifice some of our needs or notions, for the greater good of our black community. We don't have to lose our 'self'to do this, but our solidarity is important.
However, if you're the "American" black man (see Clarence Thomas, Armstrong Williams, Ward Connerly et. al.)...they who have no history (that they want to acknowledge), they who have no culture (or think it only began in 1619 at Jamestown), they who probably don't want to be around a roomful of people who look like them (self-hating of the highest order)...and thus, we read - "I recognize that the desire to celebrate customs and traditions is a good one, but Kwanzaa's emphasis on Africa simply has no personal appeal to me. I am American, not African". Most folks don't celebrate Kwanzaa beyond noting it's start and ending times, but if one was on a campus where you are a part of a tiny black faculty, and it was a sanctioned campus event like this one was, you would think one would feel a spiritual and dare I say, ancestral, obligation to go and support my colleagues.
I should note here that this supporting of your fellow colleagues, is duplicated campus-wide among other self-defined organizations like Hillel and related Jewish groups, Latino/Hispanic functions, Greek organizations, etc.- all are ethnically and culturally relevant to particular students and faculty. It's even duplicated in our congress, with the Black caucus, Latino caucus, Woman's caucus, Jewish caucus, and other caucuses as examples.
Then the author who is only mindful of recent history says this, "I applauded, too, even though I knew blacks had accomplished more in the past 40 years than in the previous 400." Yes, like Condi, Colin, Clarence?....the advances are mind-numbing ...and aren't we all benefiting phenomenally?? Or is it only a select few that are benefiting - like Dubois' "talented tenth"? In fact we are not all benefiting even a little bit, not withstanding his noting the hundreds of well-dressed blacks in attendance at the M.L.King breakfast, but conveniently forgetting or ignoring the multiple thousands of less fortunate blacks who would be hard-pressed to applaud any progress in the last 40 years, and who would be unable to even afford to attend this breakfast.
Oops....someone on the "programming committee" needs to be fired it seems! As the author notes by saying - "at some point I glanced at Brenda, whose mouth and eyes were opened wide, and then I scanned the room and saw similar expressions of disbelief, including on the faces of some of the event organizers and the colleague who had invited me...and never again would I applaud speeches that celebrated the myth of black defeat, and I would not participate in events simply because of the color of my skin." When did speeches of historical relevance become "celebrations of 'black defeat'?
This speaks volumes of the author's consciousness (or lack thereof), and his comments about the segregation of black commencement exercises is also unfortunate. What is wrong with a private supplemental graduation exercise, recognizing the hard work and achievement of the black graduates? So he did not like the speaker nor the 'entertainment' offered - so what? Has he always liked everything that white groups do?
Lastly, his comments in general, connote a dismissive and overly critical view of anything that has a black cultural connection - this is what he is running away from!...and it would be curious to know if his wife, Brenda, is black, or some other ethnicity. One can wonder if that has a lot to do with his lack of cultural identification and his hesitancy to identify with his black colleagues. And his, "I intend to be visible.........but only in ways I wish to be seen" comment, means he will be mostly invisible in the future - and to that many will say, a hearty amen and good riddance!
The fact is, the author will be yet another member of the higher education community who does not execute a "fade-to-black" (seen and visible, regardless of whether scorned or applauded), but does a "fade-to-clear" (invisible and a non-entity), which will likely be his metaphor of achievement and resulting legacy.
(bennie thanks Nezet 'Prophet of The Surreal' for his invaluable inputs to this post)
Sunday, October 07, 2007
Nobody Knows The Lynchings He's Seen
"WHAT'S the difference between a low-tech lynching and a high-tech lynching? A high-tech lynching brings a tenured job on the Supreme Court and a $1.5 million book deal. A low-tech lynching, not so much." http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/07/opinion/07rich.html?hp
This is how the brilliant article by Frank Rich of the NYTimes starts off, as he reviews Thomas's new book, "My Grandfather's Son", and his '60 Minutes' guest appearance last Sunday evening.
Early this morning, C-Span2 re-broadcasted their live coverage of a book signing for Thomas hosted by Armstrong Williams, and this was the first time I had ever seen major republican political players, in an informal and unscripted social setting.
At the risk of sounding overly dramatic, I was struck by how 'normal' this event seemed, considering that most of those attending were right-wing republican ideologues and key supporters and purveyors of one of the most inhumane, costly, deadly and disastrous wars in US history. Attending were luminaries like V.P. Chaney, John Bolton, Michael Chertoff, Arlen Specter, Sen. Lindsay Graham, Thomas and his wife Virginia, most of the supreme court justices and their wives , and even black sportscaster, Stephen A. Smith.
The light-hearted banter and joking that flowed between the attendees, belied their deadly, flawed politics. As a comparison, I remember reading of the many social events and classical/opera concerts that leading Nazi party officials loved to attend in Germany, during WW2. The authors of those reports could not understand how architects of the evils of Nazism, could seem so 'normal' and yet be so evil. Likewise, the air of conviviality at this book signing, and it's 'fiddling while Rome is burning' in Iraq, and as it did at Katrina, seemed surreal and strange to me, and gave me an eerie and disquieted feeling while watching it.
Thomas was very upbeat and jocular while uttering bromides like "stay positive and think positive" to his well-wishers. When asked whether he read Anita Hill's NYTimes op-ed rebuttal to his books assertions, he just laughed and sneered dismissively that he would never, ever, waste his time reading it.
So this was just a tiny glimpse into Clarence Thomas's world and those who share it with him.....Happily, I want no part of that slimy world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)