The Iraqi 'government' that is in place today, is a puppet government that was installed by our government, only to be a rubber stamp for our agenda in that region. One example of this agenda, is the coming enacting of the 'Hydro-Carbon Law'. This piece of legislation will compel the Sunni and the Shia to reach an agreement concerning the control and distribution of a paltry 15% of Iraq's oil resources....while ceding control of the remaining 85% (worth over ten trillion dollars), to American oil companies, in 30-year leases - tax free!
Beyond our agenda, to say this so-called Iraqi 'government' is sovereign, is laughable on it's face, and is as mythical as the WMDs they supposedly possessed but have not yet been found, in the four years we have been occupying Iraq.
Let's stop perpetrating this myth of their sovereignty!
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Violence By Words, By Deeds, and By Guns
This past week, we have witnessed further examples of the violence that can be perpetrated by words and by guns. Imus' words attacked the Rutgers team members and caused a firestorm of protests, which led to the killing of his career, at least temporarily. And the foreign student at Virginia Tech, who attacked students and professors with lethal guns and a mass murderer's ferocity, resulting in the killing of 32 persons and himself, so far.
These are only recent examples of the violence lurking in the American culture. Far worse, is the violence being inflicted on Iraq, where we invaded on a pretext, and where numerous horrific killings are a daily occurrence, and where the daily death toll, often far exceeds the number just reported killed on the Virginia Tech campus.
Then we have the violence of poverty; the violence of inadequate health care; the violence of video games; the violence of discriminative criminal sentencing; the violence of drugs and it's culture; the violence of unemployment; the violence in television and cable programming; the violence in the words of the numerous 'shock jocks' and racist haters on our airwaves; the violence of the NRA's promotion of the gun culture, and unrestricted and unfettered access to guns; the violence of US foreign policy around the world; the violence of our country's founding; the violence of slavery; the violence of thousands of lynchings; the violence of the Jim Crow era; the violence of no reparations; the violence of stealing the election in Florida in 2000, and in Ohio in 2004; the violence in the financing, recording and distribution of demeaning sexist and misogynistic rap records; the violence of our soldiers being returned to the war theatre multiple times, and for extended periods of time; the violence of exporting needed well-paying jobs overseas; the violence of......!
Just pick your topic, and you will find ample evidences of our history of violence - in all areas of our culture and society. We are a violent people, and should not be surprised when examples of our violence proneness erupts. We can't escape the consequences of our cultural and societal dysfunction.
The Scripture in Hosea 8:7 says, "...For they have sown the wind, and have reaped the whirlwind: ...."
These are only recent examples of the violence lurking in the American culture. Far worse, is the violence being inflicted on Iraq, where we invaded on a pretext, and where numerous horrific killings are a daily occurrence, and where the daily death toll, often far exceeds the number just reported killed on the Virginia Tech campus.
Then we have the violence of poverty; the violence of inadequate health care; the violence of video games; the violence of discriminative criminal sentencing; the violence of drugs and it's culture; the violence of unemployment; the violence in television and cable programming; the violence in the words of the numerous 'shock jocks' and racist haters on our airwaves; the violence of the NRA's promotion of the gun culture, and unrestricted and unfettered access to guns; the violence of US foreign policy around the world; the violence of our country's founding; the violence of slavery; the violence of thousands of lynchings; the violence of the Jim Crow era; the violence of no reparations; the violence of stealing the election in Florida in 2000, and in Ohio in 2004; the violence in the financing, recording and distribution of demeaning sexist and misogynistic rap records; the violence of our soldiers being returned to the war theatre multiple times, and for extended periods of time; the violence of exporting needed well-paying jobs overseas; the violence of......!
Just pick your topic, and you will find ample evidences of our history of violence - in all areas of our culture and society. We are a violent people, and should not be surprised when examples of our violence proneness erupts. We can't escape the consequences of our cultural and societal dysfunction.
The Scripture in Hosea 8:7 says, "...For they have sown the wind, and have reaped the whirlwind: ...."
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Imus is a Racist Ass!
So what else is new? - this is not a revelation to most people that have heard him over the years. His denial that he is a racist, is standard fare - I rarely hear a racist admit what they are. He is no exception.
There are far worst haters on the air like Limbaugh, Beck etc., but they all never cross the line of truly offending one notable group, the Jews. If Imus had said the holocaust was a myth, every Jewish organization would be calling for his scalp, and they would not be excusing his offensive words on the basis that he he was trying to be funny and he has been doing it for a long time. Some are giving him a pass on this latest offensive incident, because they assume he was merely trying to be funny, and doing it for the shock value. They would never make that assumption and excuse him, if he denied the holocaust or some other similar things offensive to Jews.
My point is that it does not matter what was his intent. It was racist and the fact that he has been making racist comments all along, does not excuse this latest outrage - like referring to the predominantly Black Rutgers female basketball team, as "nappy-haired ho's".
The standard should not be his intent, but what he said. Jews would never excuse him on the basis that his intent was to be merely funny. No one would say he was denying the holocaust for entertainment purposes or for shock value, so Blacks and progressive, thinking Americans, should not excuse him on this one either.
There are far worst haters on the air like Limbaugh, Beck etc., but they all never cross the line of truly offending one notable group, the Jews. If Imus had said the holocaust was a myth, every Jewish organization would be calling for his scalp, and they would not be excusing his offensive words on the basis that he he was trying to be funny and he has been doing it for a long time. Some are giving him a pass on this latest offensive incident, because they assume he was merely trying to be funny, and doing it for the shock value. They would never make that assumption and excuse him, if he denied the holocaust or some other similar things offensive to Jews.
My point is that it does not matter what was his intent. It was racist and the fact that he has been making racist comments all along, does not excuse this latest outrage - like referring to the predominantly Black Rutgers female basketball team, as "nappy-haired ho's".
The standard should not be his intent, but what he said. Jews would never excuse him on the basis that his intent was to be merely funny. No one would say he was denying the holocaust for entertainment purposes or for shock value, so Blacks and progressive, thinking Americans, should not excuse him on this one either.
Wednesday, April 04, 2007
White-on-White Crime?
Statistically, 86% of all Whites murdered, are murdered by other Whites. The percentages are roughly the same or higher for Asian-on-Asian, Latino-on-Latino, and Black-on-Black murders.
It's clear that the vast majority of crimes committed, are by members of the same ethnic group against other members of that group. Yet, we rarely, if ever, hear about White-on-White, Asian-on-Asian, or Latino-on-Latino crime, and certainly not with the same frequency, or level of scorn and derision, as when Black-on-Black crime is discussed. It is discussed as if, only Blacks have some special defect, mental deformity, or social or moral impairment, that drives their crime rates upward and against themselves.
The term, Black-on-Black crime, is a Rethugnant talking point, said with enough frequency and vehemence to demonize Blacks, and to instill in the minds of the public, further disrespect and ill-will towards it's Black citizens. Even Blacks have unthinkingly started using this phrase, as if it were an isolated fact unique only to Blacks.
In fact, in the Black community, there is a direct statistical correlation between high poverty rates, high unemployment rates, and crime. Significantly lowering either or both of the former, will have a direct impact on the latter.
Since poverty rates and unemployment rates are quite a bit lower in the other ethnic communities, while educational rates are significantly higher, what then could be the basis for their crime rates? hmmmmm.
It's clear that the vast majority of crimes committed, are by members of the same ethnic group against other members of that group. Yet, we rarely, if ever, hear about White-on-White, Asian-on-Asian, or Latino-on-Latino crime, and certainly not with the same frequency, or level of scorn and derision, as when Black-on-Black crime is discussed. It is discussed as if, only Blacks have some special defect, mental deformity, or social or moral impairment, that drives their crime rates upward and against themselves.
The term, Black-on-Black crime, is a Rethugnant talking point, said with enough frequency and vehemence to demonize Blacks, and to instill in the minds of the public, further disrespect and ill-will towards it's Black citizens. Even Blacks have unthinkingly started using this phrase, as if it were an isolated fact unique only to Blacks.
In fact, in the Black community, there is a direct statistical correlation between high poverty rates, high unemployment rates, and crime. Significantly lowering either or both of the former, will have a direct impact on the latter.
Since poverty rates and unemployment rates are quite a bit lower in the other ethnic communities, while educational rates are significantly higher, what then could be the basis for their crime rates? hmmmmm.
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
A Level Playing Field?
In the Los Angeles Unified School District which has mostly non-white students, 70% of the children qualify for the unappetizing breakfast and school lunch program, 65% are in foster care, many bathrooms of most schools are filthy and never cleaned up, paint is peeling from the walls of classrooms of most of the schools, and by every measure, the district schools are a sub-standard mess.
When public figures like Oprah say, "Black children in this country don't want to learn", the proper response is, who would want to or could learn, under these conditions? No other ethnic group is expected to learn under these third-world conditions of hunger and squalor, not Asians, not Whites, not anyone else but Black and immigrant Latino children.
So when these children are blamed for not wanting to learn in this benignly neglected environment, let it be known that those casting the blame, are guilty of ignoring and not denouncing, a most unlevel playing field that no one else's children are ever expected to play on or compete on.
Those guilty of this criminal neglect or those who ignore it, cannot offset this guilt by acts of charity in other countries or in other areas to compensate.
When public figures like Oprah say, "Black children in this country don't want to learn", the proper response is, who would want to or could learn, under these conditions? No other ethnic group is expected to learn under these third-world conditions of hunger and squalor, not Asians, not Whites, not anyone else but Black and immigrant Latino children.
So when these children are blamed for not wanting to learn in this benignly neglected environment, let it be known that those casting the blame, are guilty of ignoring and not denouncing, a most unlevel playing field that no one else's children are ever expected to play on or compete on.
Those guilty of this criminal neglect or those who ignore it, cannot offset this guilt by acts of charity in other countries or in other areas to compensate.
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Tolerant But, Unsupportive
Here I go again, sticking my toes into the waters of a complex, divisive and controversial issue, most recently highlighted by the remarks of the retired NBA star, Tim Hardaway. The audio clip of him saying that "...he hates gay people..." has been reverberating throughout the media this past week. What he said has been rightfully condemned as intolerant, but the more important issue for me is, can you be tolerant and yet unsupportive of the lifestyle? I think yes, and this is my basic position.
His remarks immediately forced me to re-examine my own feelings on the issue of homosexuality. I know that I don't hate gays and if the estimates are correct, it's very likely there may be some members of my extended family who are also gay. On the other hand, I know that I don't support the gay lifestyle based on Scriptural prohibitions (Lev. 18:22, 20:13, 1 Cor. 6:9,10) plus my own view of what I consider 'normal' and what is not. By the way, Leviticus also condemns "..laying with a beast.." (Lev. 20:15), which I also consider to be a perversion.
I don't know enough about homosexuality to decide if it is voluntary or an involuntary choice. I would opine however, that bestiality is voluntary and a perversion, and few if any, would argue with that. If the latter is voluntary and perverse, does the former qualify as well?
These are just some of the issues that were raised by Hardaway's remarks. Where do you stand?
His remarks immediately forced me to re-examine my own feelings on the issue of homosexuality. I know that I don't hate gays and if the estimates are correct, it's very likely there may be some members of my extended family who are also gay. On the other hand, I know that I don't support the gay lifestyle based on Scriptural prohibitions (Lev. 18:22, 20:13, 1 Cor. 6:9,10) plus my own view of what I consider 'normal' and what is not. By the way, Leviticus also condemns "..laying with a beast.." (Lev. 20:15), which I also consider to be a perversion.
I don't know enough about homosexuality to decide if it is voluntary or an involuntary choice. I would opine however, that bestiality is voluntary and a perversion, and few if any, would argue with that. If the latter is voluntary and perverse, does the former qualify as well?
These are just some of the issues that were raised by Hardaway's remarks. Where do you stand?
Friday, February 16, 2007
Who's The Daddy??..(and other unseemly questions)
Is it my imagination, or is the circus surrounding the recent death of the pitiable Anna Nicole Smith, morphing into one of the biggest soap operas of our times?
With four or more men claiming to be possibly the daddy of her six-month old daughter, what is one to think of her? Would any other non-celebrity woman not be considered a slut, a 'ho, or worse? So far, none of these obvious labels are being applied to her by the adoring, frenzied media that is reporting on her death and the ensuing struggle for her estate.
What is also unspoken, but certainly something I would be looking into if I were investigating her death, is the death of the sole beneficiary named in her will, her son, who died mysteriously mere weeks before her own death. How convenient for the man who was her lawyer and who has been named the executor of her multi-million dollar estate, and who also claims to be her 'husband' by virtue of a 'commitment ceremony' that neither the Bahamas nor the United States recognizes, and who also claims to be the father of her six-month old child.
If you ask me, the old adage, "follow the money", is the most important principle that everyone following this matter should keep in mind.
With four or more men claiming to be possibly the daddy of her six-month old daughter, what is one to think of her? Would any other non-celebrity woman not be considered a slut, a 'ho, or worse? So far, none of these obvious labels are being applied to her by the adoring, frenzied media that is reporting on her death and the ensuing struggle for her estate.
What is also unspoken, but certainly something I would be looking into if I were investigating her death, is the death of the sole beneficiary named in her will, her son, who died mysteriously mere weeks before her own death. How convenient for the man who was her lawyer and who has been named the executor of her multi-million dollar estate, and who also claims to be her 'husband' by virtue of a 'commitment ceremony' that neither the Bahamas nor the United States recognizes, and who also claims to be the father of her six-month old child.
If you ask me, the old adage, "follow the money", is the most important principle that everyone following this matter should keep in mind.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)