LONG-term mobile phone users could face a higher risk of developing cancer in later life, according to a decade-long study.
The report, to be published later this year, has reportedly found that heavy mobile use is linked to brain tumours.
The survey of 12,800 people in 13 countries has been overseen by the World Health Organisation.
Preliminary results of the inquiry, which is looking at whether mobile phone exposure is linked to three types of brain tumour and a tumour of the salivary gland, have been sent to a scientific journal.
The findings are expected to put pressure on the British Government – which has insisted that mobile phones are safe – to issue stronger warnings to users.
Monday, October 26, 2009
STUDY: African Americans Face A HIGHER RISK Of Colorectal Cancer!!!!
African Americans are at significantly higher risk of developing colorectal cancer, and being diagnosed with the disease at a later stage, than other ethnic groups. That's the finding of a paper being presented at the annual meeting of the American College of Gastroenterology in San Diego.
Robert Wong, M.D., and his colleagues at California Pacific Medical Center looked at records of more than 500,000 cases of colorectal cancer, diagnosed between 1973 and 2004, analyzing them for race and sex-specific disparities. In the study proximal colon cancers included the cecum, ascending colon, up to the point of the hepatic flexure, which is the point where the colon makes a turn to become the transverse colon. They found that African American males were more than twice as likely as Asian American males to be diagnosed with proximal cancer (25.2 per 100,000/year vs 11.7 per 100,000 year.). The rate among African American women was also twice that of Asian American women (21.9 vs 11.4). Similar disparities were seen between African Americans, both men and women, and whites and Hispanics.
"I was surprised at how big the differences were between the various groups," says Wong, the lead author of the study. "I had done similar research on liver cancer in the past and found that racial and ethnic differences were present, but not nearly as stark as this."
The differences were not just in numbers but also in the severity of the disease. African Americans had the highest rates of advanced cancer, with the rate among both African American men and women nearly double that of Hispanic men and women. The more advanced the disease is when diagnosed the poorer the outcome for the patient.
"I think access to care plays a huge role in determining who is at risk and how great that risk is," says Wong. "But access alone does not explain all the differences. It's likely that for some socio-economic groups education is also critical. Members of certain groups may not have enough information on education and the importance of screening."
Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer and the second most common cause of death from cancer in the United States. The researchers hope that identifying which groups are at highest risk will help in guiding changes and improvements in cancer screening programs.
Robert Wong, M.D., and his colleagues at California Pacific Medical Center looked at records of more than 500,000 cases of colorectal cancer, diagnosed between 1973 and 2004, analyzing them for race and sex-specific disparities. In the study proximal colon cancers included the cecum, ascending colon, up to the point of the hepatic flexure, which is the point where the colon makes a turn to become the transverse colon. They found that African American males were more than twice as likely as Asian American males to be diagnosed with proximal cancer (25.2 per 100,000/year vs 11.7 per 100,000 year.). The rate among African American women was also twice that of Asian American women (21.9 vs 11.4). Similar disparities were seen between African Americans, both men and women, and whites and Hispanics.
"I was surprised at how big the differences were between the various groups," says Wong, the lead author of the study. "I had done similar research on liver cancer in the past and found that racial and ethnic differences were present, but not nearly as stark as this."
The differences were not just in numbers but also in the severity of the disease. African Americans had the highest rates of advanced cancer, with the rate among both African American men and women nearly double that of Hispanic men and women. The more advanced the disease is when diagnosed the poorer the outcome for the patient.
"I think access to care plays a huge role in determining who is at risk and how great that risk is," says Wong. "But access alone does not explain all the differences. It's likely that for some socio-economic groups education is also critical. Members of certain groups may not have enough information on education and the importance of screening."
Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer and the second most common cause of death from cancer in the United States. The researchers hope that identifying which groups are at highest risk will help in guiding changes and improvements in cancer screening programs.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
72 Democrats Sell Out Public on Net Neutrality-They Side w/ AT&T????
Seventy-two Democrats – count ‘em – just backstabbed you. This afternoon, they sent a letter to the Federal Communications Commission asking them to walk away from their plans to protect Net Neutrality.
They also defected from their own party, abandoning President Obama’s tech agenda that supports a free and open Internet, where competition and innovation can flourish.
Wish I could say this is a joke, but the letter hit my desk an hour ago, 72 signatures included.
It’s outrageous: Dozens of the lawmakers we’ve elected to look out for us in Washington are saying they’d rather hand the Internet over to a few powerful corporations than safeguard it for the public.
And the cause of this congressional panic? A progressive proposal that the FCC just wants to circulate for public comment.
In September, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski announced that the commission would expand rules to protect Net Neutrality, the principle that stops Internet service providers from blocking and controlling online content. On Thursday, the FCC will vote on a notice of proposed rulemaking to establish Net Neutrality rules, which is the first step in the regulatory process.
But the deep-pocketed telco lobby on the Hill is doing everything it can to derail protections for an open Internet. And it appears to be working. After all, the Dems’ letter parrots telco talking points – they had to come from somewhere, and it certainly wasn’t from the more than 1.6 million people who have signed a petition in support of Net Neutrality.
How is it that a handful of corporations are co-opting the debate, even as hundreds of thousands of people say, “Enough is enough”? This is a clear example of “special interests” vs. “real Americans.” Corporations don’t want any rules that prohibit them from acting as Internet gatekeepers – they don’t even want the FCC to consider them. And they’ve got the influence and power to convince lawmakers to act against our interests and reject an open Internet.
But we’re powerful, too, and we’ve got to show it. Now’s not the time to be timid. We want two million people shouting for Net Neutrality to send a resounding message to the FCC that the public supports them.
Add your name to the petition for an open Internet right now. Then Tweet it. Facebook it. Ask your friends to do it. The fight for Net Neutrality is very real, and it’s getting nasty.
They also defected from their own party, abandoning President Obama’s tech agenda that supports a free and open Internet, where competition and innovation can flourish.
Wish I could say this is a joke, but the letter hit my desk an hour ago, 72 signatures included.
It’s outrageous: Dozens of the lawmakers we’ve elected to look out for us in Washington are saying they’d rather hand the Internet over to a few powerful corporations than safeguard it for the public.
And the cause of this congressional panic? A progressive proposal that the FCC just wants to circulate for public comment.
In September, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski announced that the commission would expand rules to protect Net Neutrality, the principle that stops Internet service providers from blocking and controlling online content. On Thursday, the FCC will vote on a notice of proposed rulemaking to establish Net Neutrality rules, which is the first step in the regulatory process.
But the deep-pocketed telco lobby on the Hill is doing everything it can to derail protections for an open Internet. And it appears to be working. After all, the Dems’ letter parrots telco talking points – they had to come from somewhere, and it certainly wasn’t from the more than 1.6 million people who have signed a petition in support of Net Neutrality.
How is it that a handful of corporations are co-opting the debate, even as hundreds of thousands of people say, “Enough is enough”? This is a clear example of “special interests” vs. “real Americans.” Corporations don’t want any rules that prohibit them from acting as Internet gatekeepers – they don’t even want the FCC to consider them. And they’ve got the influence and power to convince lawmakers to act against our interests and reject an open Internet.
But we’re powerful, too, and we’ve got to show it. Now’s not the time to be timid. We want two million people shouting for Net Neutrality to send a resounding message to the FCC that the public supports them.
Add your name to the petition for an open Internet right now. Then Tweet it. Facebook it. Ask your friends to do it. The fight for Net Neutrality is very real, and it’s getting nasty.
New Study Finds That 1 In 6 Americans IS IN POVERTY!!!!
The level of poverty in America is even worse than first believed.
A revised formula for calculating medical costs and geographic variations show that approximately 47.4 million Americans last year lived in poverty, 7 million more than the government's official figure.
The disparity occurs because of differing formulas the Census Bureau and the National Academy of Science use for calculating the poverty rate. The NAS formula shows the poverty rate to be at 15.8 percent, or nearly 1 in 6 Americans, according to calculations released this week. That's higher than the 13.2 percent, or 39.8 million, figure made available recently under the original government formula.
That measure, created in 1955, does not factor in rising medical care, transportation, child care or geographical variations in living costs. Nor does it consider non-cash government aid when calculating income. As a result, official figures released last month by Census may have overlooked millions of poor people, many of them 65 and older.
According to the revised NAS formula:
_About 18.7 percent of Americans 65 and older, or nearly 7.1 million, are in poverty compared to 9.7 percent, or 3.7 million, under the traditional measure. That's due to out-of-pocket expenses from rising Medicare premiums, deductibles and a coverage gap in the prescription drug benefit.
_About 14.3 percent of people 18 to 64, or 27 million, are in poverty, compared to 11.7 percent under the traditional measure. Many of the additional poor are low-income, working people with transportation and child-care costs.
_Child poverty is lower, at about 17.9 percent, or roughly 13.3 million, compared to 19 percent under the traditional measure. That's because single mothers and their children disproportionately receive non-cash aid such as food stamps.
_Poverty rates were higher for non-Hispanic whites (11 percent), Asians (17 percent) and Hispanics (29 percent) when compared to the traditional measure. For blacks, poverty remained flat at 24.7 percent, due to the cushioning effect of non-cash aid.
_The Northeast and West saw bigger jumps in poverty, due largely to cities with higher costs of living such as New York, Boston, Los Angeles and San Francisco.
The Census Bureau said it expedited release of the alternative numbers for this month because of the interest expressed by lawmakers and the Obama administration in seeing a fuller range of numbers. Legislation pending in Congress would mandate a switch to the revised formula, although the White House could choose to act on its own.
Arloc Sherman, a senior researcher at the nonprofit Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said that because the revised formula factors in non-cash government aid, the amount of increase in poverty from 2007 to 2008 was generally smaller compared to the current measure.
"Food stamp participation rose during the first year of recession and appears to have softened what could have been an even greater increase in financial hardship," he said.
Sherman said the revised formula could take on greater importance in measuring poverty for 2009 as more Americans take advantage of tax credits and food stamps under the federal stimulus program. Food stamp assistance currently is at an all-time high of about 36 million.
A revised formula for calculating medical costs and geographic variations show that approximately 47.4 million Americans last year lived in poverty, 7 million more than the government's official figure.
The disparity occurs because of differing formulas the Census Bureau and the National Academy of Science use for calculating the poverty rate. The NAS formula shows the poverty rate to be at 15.8 percent, or nearly 1 in 6 Americans, according to calculations released this week. That's higher than the 13.2 percent, or 39.8 million, figure made available recently under the original government formula.
That measure, created in 1955, does not factor in rising medical care, transportation, child care or geographical variations in living costs. Nor does it consider non-cash government aid when calculating income. As a result, official figures released last month by Census may have overlooked millions of poor people, many of them 65 and older.
According to the revised NAS formula:
_About 18.7 percent of Americans 65 and older, or nearly 7.1 million, are in poverty compared to 9.7 percent, or 3.7 million, under the traditional measure. That's due to out-of-pocket expenses from rising Medicare premiums, deductibles and a coverage gap in the prescription drug benefit.
_About 14.3 percent of people 18 to 64, or 27 million, are in poverty, compared to 11.7 percent under the traditional measure. Many of the additional poor are low-income, working people with transportation and child-care costs.
_Child poverty is lower, at about 17.9 percent, or roughly 13.3 million, compared to 19 percent under the traditional measure. That's because single mothers and their children disproportionately receive non-cash aid such as food stamps.
_Poverty rates were higher for non-Hispanic whites (11 percent), Asians (17 percent) and Hispanics (29 percent) when compared to the traditional measure. For blacks, poverty remained flat at 24.7 percent, due to the cushioning effect of non-cash aid.
_The Northeast and West saw bigger jumps in poverty, due largely to cities with higher costs of living such as New York, Boston, Los Angeles and San Francisco.
The Census Bureau said it expedited release of the alternative numbers for this month because of the interest expressed by lawmakers and the Obama administration in seeing a fuller range of numbers. Legislation pending in Congress would mandate a switch to the revised formula, although the White House could choose to act on its own.
Arloc Sherman, a senior researcher at the nonprofit Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said that because the revised formula factors in non-cash government aid, the amount of increase in poverty from 2007 to 2008 was generally smaller compared to the current measure.
"Food stamp participation rose during the first year of recession and appears to have softened what could have been an even greater increase in financial hardship," he said.
Sherman said the revised formula could take on greater importance in measuring poverty for 2009 as more Americans take advantage of tax credits and food stamps under the federal stimulus program. Food stamp assistance currently is at an all-time high of about 36 million.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Louis Farrakhan Tells Followers Not To BE PACIFIED By President Obama's Election!!!!
Minister Louis Farrakhan on Sunday urged his followers not to become complacent by President Barack Obama's election and to work to repair communities.
The 76-year-old Nation of Islam leader said in a speech commemorating the 14th anniversary of the Million Man March that people shouldn't become pacified by the election of the first black president.
"This can pacify you and lull you to sleep in a dangerous time, making you think that we live in a post-racial America—when the opposite is true," he said to loud applause.
The Chicago-based Nation of Islam has embraced black nationalism since its founding in the 1930s, and has used Obama's election as a launching point for celebration, intellectual discussion and a call to action.
"You may not be pleased with everything he's saying and doing, but you have to understand that he's been voted in to take care of the affairs of a nation, and not yours and mine particularly," Farrakhan said. "He's the American president, not the black president."
Given those broad responsibilities, African-Americans need to "accept responsibility to build our own communities," Farrakhan said.
Farrakhan has recently had a strong presence at events addressing a rise in youth violence. He has said the death of Derrion Albert, a Chicago high school honor student fatally beaten by other teens in an attack captured on video, should be a call to action.
Sunday's speech was billed as a plan to focus on reducing crime. Farrakhan didn't lay out details in his 2 1/2-hour address, but said members of the Nation of Islam have shown a blueprint for helping people repair their lives. The organization has long focused efforts on recruiting in prisons by encouraging inmates to study the movement's teachings.
"They're going to prisons and they make a man and a woman whole, the prostitute gets cleaned up, the drug addict gets changed," he said. "You see a model in Muslims in the Nation of Islam when our people come into the mosque toxic and then are made useful."
Farrakhan said the theme of repairing communities will become the basis of a series of future lectures. The leader regularly speaks at the movement's headquarters, Mosque Maryam. The lectures are widely distributed throughout the movement.
Farrakhan was joined on stage by recently resigned Memphis Mayor Willie Herenton, who has announced a Democratic primary challenge to U.S. Rep. Steve Cohen, a white congressman who has represented the mostly black House district for two terms.
In comments to the crowd before the speech, Herenton recalled presenting Farrakhan with a key to the city despite the controversy it caused.
"It was easy for me as a mayor to present a key ... to a man who is worthy, to a man who speaks truth, to a man who possesses wisdom, to a man who is courageous in thought and in action," said Herenton, who was the first elected black mayor of Memphis. "To an anointed man."
The 76-year-old Nation of Islam leader said in a speech commemorating the 14th anniversary of the Million Man March that people shouldn't become pacified by the election of the first black president.
"This can pacify you and lull you to sleep in a dangerous time, making you think that we live in a post-racial America—when the opposite is true," he said to loud applause.
The Chicago-based Nation of Islam has embraced black nationalism since its founding in the 1930s, and has used Obama's election as a launching point for celebration, intellectual discussion and a call to action.
"You may not be pleased with everything he's saying and doing, but you have to understand that he's been voted in to take care of the affairs of a nation, and not yours and mine particularly," Farrakhan said. "He's the American president, not the black president."
Given those broad responsibilities, African-Americans need to "accept responsibility to build our own communities," Farrakhan said.
Farrakhan has recently had a strong presence at events addressing a rise in youth violence. He has said the death of Derrion Albert, a Chicago high school honor student fatally beaten by other teens in an attack captured on video, should be a call to action.
Sunday's speech was billed as a plan to focus on reducing crime. Farrakhan didn't lay out details in his 2 1/2-hour address, but said members of the Nation of Islam have shown a blueprint for helping people repair their lives. The organization has long focused efforts on recruiting in prisons by encouraging inmates to study the movement's teachings.
"They're going to prisons and they make a man and a woman whole, the prostitute gets cleaned up, the drug addict gets changed," he said. "You see a model in Muslims in the Nation of Islam when our people come into the mosque toxic and then are made useful."
Farrakhan said the theme of repairing communities will become the basis of a series of future lectures. The leader regularly speaks at the movement's headquarters, Mosque Maryam. The lectures are widely distributed throughout the movement.
Farrakhan was joined on stage by recently resigned Memphis Mayor Willie Herenton, who has announced a Democratic primary challenge to U.S. Rep. Steve Cohen, a white congressman who has represented the mostly black House district for two terms.
In comments to the crowd before the speech, Herenton recalled presenting Farrakhan with a key to the city despite the controversy it caused.
"It was easy for me as a mayor to present a key ... to a man who is worthy, to a man who speaks truth, to a man who possesses wisdom, to a man who is courageous in thought and in action," said Herenton, who was the first elected black mayor of Memphis. "To an anointed man."
Poverty level in America is even worse than first believed!!!!!
The level of poverty in America is even worse than first believed.
A revised formula for calculating medical costs and geographic variations show that approximately 47.4 million Americans last year lived in poverty, 7 million more than the government's official figure.
The disparity occurs because of differing formulas the Census Bureau and the National Academy of Science use for calculating the poverty rate. The NAS formula shows the poverty rate to be at 15.8 percent, or nearly 1 in 6 Americans, according to calculations released this week. That's higher than the 13.2 percent, or 39.8 million, figure made available recently under the original government formula.
That measure, created in 1955, does not factor in rising medical care, transportation, child care or geographical variations in living costs. Nor does it consider non-cash government aid when calculating income. As a result, official figures released last month by Census may have overlooked millions of poor people, many of them 65 and older.
According to the revised NAS formula:
_About 18.7 percent of Americans 65 and older, or nearly 7.1 million, are in poverty compared to 9.7 percent, or 3.7 million, under the traditional measure. That's due to out-of-pocket expenses from rising Medicare premiums, deductibles and a coverage gap in the prescription drug benefit.
_About 14.3 percent of people 18 to 64, or 27 million, are in poverty, compared to 11.7 percent under the traditional measure. Many of the additional poor are low-income, working people with transportation and child-care costs.
_Child poverty is lower, at about 17.9 percent, or roughly 13.3 million, compared to 19 percent under the traditional measure. That's because single mothers and their children disproportionately receive non-cash aid such as food stamps.
_Poverty rates were higher for non-Hispanic whites (11 percent), Asians (17 percent) and Hispanics (29 percent) when compared to the traditional measure. For blacks, poverty remained flat at 24.7 percent, due to the cushioning effect of non-cash aid.
_The Northeast and West saw bigger jumps in poverty, due largely to cities with higher costs of living such as New York, Boston, Los Angeles and San Francisco.
The Census Bureau said it expedited release of the alternative numbers for this month because of the interest expressed by lawmakers and the Obama administration in seeing a fuller range of numbers. Legislation pending in Congress would mandate a switch to the revised formula, although the White House could choose to act on its own.
Arloc Sherman, a senior researcher at the nonprofit Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said that because the revised formula factors in non-cash government aid, the amount of increase in poverty from 2007 to 2008 was generally smaller compared to the current measure.
"Food stamp participation rose during the first year of recession and appears to have softened what could have been an even greater increase in financial hardship," he said.
Sherman said the revised formula could take on greater importance in measuring poverty for 2009 as more Americans take advantage of tax credits and food stamps under the federal stimulus program. Food stamp assistance currently is at an all-time high of about 36 million.
A revised formula for calculating medical costs and geographic variations show that approximately 47.4 million Americans last year lived in poverty, 7 million more than the government's official figure.
The disparity occurs because of differing formulas the Census Bureau and the National Academy of Science use for calculating the poverty rate. The NAS formula shows the poverty rate to be at 15.8 percent, or nearly 1 in 6 Americans, according to calculations released this week. That's higher than the 13.2 percent, or 39.8 million, figure made available recently under the original government formula.
That measure, created in 1955, does not factor in rising medical care, transportation, child care or geographical variations in living costs. Nor does it consider non-cash government aid when calculating income. As a result, official figures released last month by Census may have overlooked millions of poor people, many of them 65 and older.
According to the revised NAS formula:
_About 18.7 percent of Americans 65 and older, or nearly 7.1 million, are in poverty compared to 9.7 percent, or 3.7 million, under the traditional measure. That's due to out-of-pocket expenses from rising Medicare premiums, deductibles and a coverage gap in the prescription drug benefit.
_About 14.3 percent of people 18 to 64, or 27 million, are in poverty, compared to 11.7 percent under the traditional measure. Many of the additional poor are low-income, working people with transportation and child-care costs.
_Child poverty is lower, at about 17.9 percent, or roughly 13.3 million, compared to 19 percent under the traditional measure. That's because single mothers and their children disproportionately receive non-cash aid such as food stamps.
_Poverty rates were higher for non-Hispanic whites (11 percent), Asians (17 percent) and Hispanics (29 percent) when compared to the traditional measure. For blacks, poverty remained flat at 24.7 percent, due to the cushioning effect of non-cash aid.
_The Northeast and West saw bigger jumps in poverty, due largely to cities with higher costs of living such as New York, Boston, Los Angeles and San Francisco.
The Census Bureau said it expedited release of the alternative numbers for this month because of the interest expressed by lawmakers and the Obama administration in seeing a fuller range of numbers. Legislation pending in Congress would mandate a switch to the revised formula, although the White House could choose to act on its own.
Arloc Sherman, a senior researcher at the nonprofit Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said that because the revised formula factors in non-cash government aid, the amount of increase in poverty from 2007 to 2008 was generally smaller compared to the current measure.
"Food stamp participation rose during the first year of recession and appears to have softened what could have been an even greater increase in financial hardship," he said.
Sherman said the revised formula could take on greater importance in measuring poverty for 2009 as more Americans take advantage of tax credits and food stamps under the federal stimulus program. Food stamp assistance currently is at an all-time high of about 36 million.
Monday, October 19, 2009
LEGALIZE IT!!! President Obama To Release NEW MARIJUANA POLICY . . . Effectively LEGALIZING IT For Medical Purposes In Fourteen States!!!
Federal drug agents won't pursue pot-smoking patients or their sanctioned suppliers in states that allow medical marijuana, under new legal guidelines to be issued Monday by the Obama administration.
Two Justice Department officials described the new policy to The Associated Press, saying prosecutors will be told it is not a good use of their time to arrest people who use or provide medical marijuana in strict compliance with state law.
The guidelines to be issued by the department do, however, make it clear that agents will go after people whose marijuana distribution goes beyond what is permitted under state law or use medical marijuana as a cover for other crimes, the officials said.
The new policy is a significant departure from the Bush administration, which insisted it would continue to enforce federal anti-pot laws regardless of state codes.
Fourteen states allow some use of marijuana for medical purposes: Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.
California is unique among those for the widespread presence of dispensaries — businesses that sell marijuana and even advertise their services. Colorado also has several dispensaries, and Rhode Island and New Mexico are in the process of licensing providers, according to the Marijuana Policy Project, a group that promotes the decriminalization of marijuana use.
Attorney General Eric Holder said in March that he wanted federal law enforcement officials to pursue those who violate both federal and state law, but it has not been clear how that goal would be put into practice.
A three-page memo spelling out the policy is expected to be sent Monday to federal prosecutors in the 14 states, and also to top officials at the FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration.
The memo, the officials said, emphasizes that prosecutors have wide discretion in choosing which cases to pursue, and says it is not a good use of federal manpower to prosecute those who are without a doubt in compliance with state law.
The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the legal guidance before it is issued.
"This is a major step forward," said Bruce Mirken, communications director for the Marijuana Policy Project. "This change in policy moves the federal government dramatically toward respecting scientific and practical reality."
At the same time, the officials said, the government will still prosecute those who use medical marijuana as a cover for other illegal activity. The memo particularly warns that some suspects may hide old-fashioned drug dealing or other crimes behind a medical marijuana business.
In particular, the memo urges prosecutors to pursue marijuana cases which involve violence, the illegal use of firearms, selling pot to minors, money laundering or involvement in other crimes.
And while the policy memo describes a change in priorities away from prosecuting medical marijuana cases, it does not rule out the possibility that the federal government could still prosecute someone whose activities are allowed under state law.
The memo, officials said, is designed to give a sense of prosecutorial priorities to U.S. attorneys in the states that allow medical marijuana. It notes that pot sales in the United States are the largest source of money for violent Mexican drug cartels, but adds that federal law enforcement agencies have limited resources.
Medical marijuana advocates have been anxious to see exactly how the administration would implement candidate Barack Obama's repeated promises to change the policy in situations in which state laws allow the use of medical marijuana.
Soon after Obama took office, DEA agents raided four dispensaries in Los Angeles, prompting confusion about the government's plans.
Two Justice Department officials described the new policy to The Associated Press, saying prosecutors will be told it is not a good use of their time to arrest people who use or provide medical marijuana in strict compliance with state law.
The guidelines to be issued by the department do, however, make it clear that agents will go after people whose marijuana distribution goes beyond what is permitted under state law or use medical marijuana as a cover for other crimes, the officials said.
The new policy is a significant departure from the Bush administration, which insisted it would continue to enforce federal anti-pot laws regardless of state codes.
Fourteen states allow some use of marijuana for medical purposes: Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.
California is unique among those for the widespread presence of dispensaries — businesses that sell marijuana and even advertise their services. Colorado also has several dispensaries, and Rhode Island and New Mexico are in the process of licensing providers, according to the Marijuana Policy Project, a group that promotes the decriminalization of marijuana use.
Attorney General Eric Holder said in March that he wanted federal law enforcement officials to pursue those who violate both federal and state law, but it has not been clear how that goal would be put into practice.
A three-page memo spelling out the policy is expected to be sent Monday to federal prosecutors in the 14 states, and also to top officials at the FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration.
The memo, the officials said, emphasizes that prosecutors have wide discretion in choosing which cases to pursue, and says it is not a good use of federal manpower to prosecute those who are without a doubt in compliance with state law.
The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the legal guidance before it is issued.
"This is a major step forward," said Bruce Mirken, communications director for the Marijuana Policy Project. "This change in policy moves the federal government dramatically toward respecting scientific and practical reality."
At the same time, the officials said, the government will still prosecute those who use medical marijuana as a cover for other illegal activity. The memo particularly warns that some suspects may hide old-fashioned drug dealing or other crimes behind a medical marijuana business.
In particular, the memo urges prosecutors to pursue marijuana cases which involve violence, the illegal use of firearms, selling pot to minors, money laundering or involvement in other crimes.
And while the policy memo describes a change in priorities away from prosecuting medical marijuana cases, it does not rule out the possibility that the federal government could still prosecute someone whose activities are allowed under state law.
The memo, officials said, is designed to give a sense of prosecutorial priorities to U.S. attorneys in the states that allow medical marijuana. It notes that pot sales in the United States are the largest source of money for violent Mexican drug cartels, but adds that federal law enforcement agencies have limited resources.
Medical marijuana advocates have been anxious to see exactly how the administration would implement candidate Barack Obama's repeated promises to change the policy in situations in which state laws allow the use of medical marijuana.
Soon after Obama took office, DEA agents raided four dispensaries in Los Angeles, prompting confusion about the government's plans.
Friday, October 16, 2009
British Show Has Scientists EXPLAIN That Black People Are GENETICALLY LESS INTELLIGENT Than Whites!!!
Anti racist groups said the broadcaster was giving legitimacy to discredited “pseudo science” which was “irresponsible”.
The first programme, Race: Science's Last Taboo, will see Rageh Omaar, a presenter on the arabic news channel Al-Jazeera, question scientists about Nobel Prize winning James Watson's claims that black people are less intelligent than other races.
In the documentary Psychology professor Richard Lynn from the University of Ulster will say there is a global "league table", using evidence from IQ tests, to claim that intelligence is linked to race, with north-east Asians in the top tier and Australian aborigines at the bottom. He says on the programme that African IQs “don’t rise up to the same level as Europeans”.
British born psychology professor J Philippe Rushton is also interviewed on the programme.
He claims the differences between black and white and East Asian brains is due to general intelligence.
He believes that while women have smaller brain sizes as men, they are just as intelligent as men, but that black people have smaller brain sizes than white people but are not as intelligent as white people.
Promoting the season, Channel 4 has also altered photos of well-known figures such as Baroness Thatcher, the Beatles and US President Barack Obama to change their racial appearances.
The decision to air the programmes during Black History Month has also been criticised.
Ged Grebby, the head of Show Racism The Red Card said: "To broadcast something as controversial is this during Black History month is the absolute antithesis of why we have it. It's about the idea of combating racism, not giving racists a platform."
Paul Meszaros, from Hope not Hate, added: “This isn’t science, this is pseudoscience. It's about giving legitimacy to discredited theories, which is dressed up in language of science which people are more likely to believe.
“It's utterly irresponsible”, he said. “We have seen the rise of racist far-right fascist groups, and by airing programmes that say racism has a scientific basis, it becomes acceptable.”
Oona King, Channel 4's head of diversity and former Labour MP, said the programme shows conclusively "that you cannot link race to IQ".
Omaar also said in a clip of the show that views society found offensive "are not defeated by being ignored".
The show also comes in the wake of the Strictly Come Dancing race row and the decision to allow BNP leader Nick Griffin to appear on Question Time.
King – who was brought in following the Shilpa Shetty race row on Celebrity Big Brother- admitted she was "slightly nervous" at the outset as race issues can range from being "vaguely controversial to incendiary".
King was asked about Strictly host Bruce Forsyth's views that the nation should treat Anton Du Beke's "slip-up" of calling his dance partner Laila Rouass a "Paki" more light-heartedly.
The diversity boss said that when Forsyth was growing up, people believed that race was an indicator of intelligence.
She said: "What's surprising is how those views directly impact us today and how those views persist."
She continued: "Sweeping racist views and opinions under the carpet will not make those views go away."
"My view is that we need to open up the terms of the debate, not close it down. I think there's room for people questioning people's responses to the debate", she said.
Another show in the series called How Racist Are You? will take 30 British volunteers to show how everyone can be susceptible to bigotry, while Is It Better To Be Mixed Race? will challenge beliefs about racial purity.
Channel 4 is also planning a programme examining a trend for "deracialisation" surgery, through the stories of people who go to extreme lengths to make their bodies look more Western.
The season also puts race issues in a historical context with its show The Human Zoo: Science's Dirty Secret.
It looks at how, in the 19th and early 20th centuries, scientists were so fascinated by race that thousands of "exotic" people from around the world were being put on display in "zoos" as scientific demonstrations of racial difference.
It tells the story of Ota Benga, a Batwa pygmy from the Belgian Congo, who was first put on display at the 1904 St Louis World’s Fair and then the Bronx Zoo where he was labelled as the 'missing link'.
The film also looks at how "pseudoscience" helped attempts to legitimise the horrors of Nazi Germany.
A Channel 4 spokesperson said: "This new season of programmes sets out to explode some of the myths about race and science and to cast light on the history and consequences of scientific racism.
"The Season debunks the myths about science and race – science has been misused to legitimise racist beliefs and practices – these programmes are the antidote to that.
"Season roundly dismisses the ideas: that race is a predictor of intelligence; that racial purity has scientific benefits and that any one race is superior to another."
The first programme, Race: Science's Last Taboo, will see Rageh Omaar, a presenter on the arabic news channel Al-Jazeera, question scientists about Nobel Prize winning James Watson's claims that black people are less intelligent than other races.
In the documentary Psychology professor Richard Lynn from the University of Ulster will say there is a global "league table", using evidence from IQ tests, to claim that intelligence is linked to race, with north-east Asians in the top tier and Australian aborigines at the bottom. He says on the programme that African IQs “don’t rise up to the same level as Europeans”.
British born psychology professor J Philippe Rushton is also interviewed on the programme.
He claims the differences between black and white and East Asian brains is due to general intelligence.
He believes that while women have smaller brain sizes as men, they are just as intelligent as men, but that black people have smaller brain sizes than white people but are not as intelligent as white people.
Promoting the season, Channel 4 has also altered photos of well-known figures such as Baroness Thatcher, the Beatles and US President Barack Obama to change their racial appearances.
The decision to air the programmes during Black History Month has also been criticised.
Ged Grebby, the head of Show Racism The Red Card said: "To broadcast something as controversial is this during Black History month is the absolute antithesis of why we have it. It's about the idea of combating racism, not giving racists a platform."
Paul Meszaros, from Hope not Hate, added: “This isn’t science, this is pseudoscience. It's about giving legitimacy to discredited theories, which is dressed up in language of science which people are more likely to believe.
“It's utterly irresponsible”, he said. “We have seen the rise of racist far-right fascist groups, and by airing programmes that say racism has a scientific basis, it becomes acceptable.”
Oona King, Channel 4's head of diversity and former Labour MP, said the programme shows conclusively "that you cannot link race to IQ".
Omaar also said in a clip of the show that views society found offensive "are not defeated by being ignored".
The show also comes in the wake of the Strictly Come Dancing race row and the decision to allow BNP leader Nick Griffin to appear on Question Time.
King – who was brought in following the Shilpa Shetty race row on Celebrity Big Brother- admitted she was "slightly nervous" at the outset as race issues can range from being "vaguely controversial to incendiary".
King was asked about Strictly host Bruce Forsyth's views that the nation should treat Anton Du Beke's "slip-up" of calling his dance partner Laila Rouass a "Paki" more light-heartedly.
The diversity boss said that when Forsyth was growing up, people believed that race was an indicator of intelligence.
She said: "What's surprising is how those views directly impact us today and how those views persist."
She continued: "Sweeping racist views and opinions under the carpet will not make those views go away."
"My view is that we need to open up the terms of the debate, not close it down. I think there's room for people questioning people's responses to the debate", she said.
Another show in the series called How Racist Are You? will take 30 British volunteers to show how everyone can be susceptible to bigotry, while Is It Better To Be Mixed Race? will challenge beliefs about racial purity.
Channel 4 is also planning a programme examining a trend for "deracialisation" surgery, through the stories of people who go to extreme lengths to make their bodies look more Western.
The season also puts race issues in a historical context with its show The Human Zoo: Science's Dirty Secret.
It looks at how, in the 19th and early 20th centuries, scientists were so fascinated by race that thousands of "exotic" people from around the world were being put on display in "zoos" as scientific demonstrations of racial difference.
It tells the story of Ota Benga, a Batwa pygmy from the Belgian Congo, who was first put on display at the 1904 St Louis World’s Fair and then the Bronx Zoo where he was labelled as the 'missing link'.
The film also looks at how "pseudoscience" helped attempts to legitimise the horrors of Nazi Germany.
A Channel 4 spokesperson said: "This new season of programmes sets out to explode some of the myths about race and science and to cast light on the history and consequences of scientific racism.
"The Season debunks the myths about science and race – science has been misused to legitimise racist beliefs and practices – these programmes are the antidote to that.
"Season roundly dismisses the ideas: that race is a predictor of intelligence; that racial purity has scientific benefits and that any one race is superior to another."
Bill Gates Donates $10M To New AFRICAN AMERICAN MUSEUM!!!
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is giving $10 million to the Smithsonian's National Museum of African American History and Culture planned for the National Mall in Washington.
The grant announced Thursday will support the capital campaign for design and construction of the new museum.
Allan Golston, president of the foundation's U.S. programs, says the museum will make the stories and history of African Americans available to everyone.
Groundbreaking is expected in 2012, and the opening is slated for 2015. Construction is expected to cost about $500 million, with half the funds to be provided by Congress.
Museum director Lonnie Bunch has been quietly working to raise funds. He says the Gates Foundation grant is a vote of confidence for the project.
The grant announced Thursday will support the capital campaign for design and construction of the new museum.
Allan Golston, president of the foundation's U.S. programs, says the museum will make the stories and history of African Americans available to everyone.
Groundbreaking is expected in 2012, and the opening is slated for 2015. Construction is expected to cost about $500 million, with half the funds to be provided by Congress.
Museum director Lonnie Bunch has been quietly working to raise funds. He says the Gates Foundation grant is a vote of confidence for the project.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
STUDY: Minority Kids LESS LIKELY To Take Asthma Medication!!!
Black and Hispanic children with asthma are less likely than their white counterparts to be taking daily medication meant to prevent asthma attacks, a U.S. study shows.
The findings, published in the medical journal Chest, suggest one reason for the generally poorer asthma control among minority children.
The study found that among 1,485 asthmatic children from four U.S. states, black children were twice as likely as white children to have gone to the emergency room for an asthma attack in the past year. Overall, 39 percent of black children had visited the ER, compared with 18 percent of white children.
Hispanic children fell in between, with 24 percent of parents reporting an ER visit in the past year.
Some clues to the disparity emerged when the researchers looked at the children's medication use. Both black and Hispanic children were less likely to be taking inhaled corticosteroids -- daily medication that is recommended for preventing attacks of breathlessness and wheezing in people with persistent asthma.
Among white children, one-third had used inhaled corticosteroids in the past 3 months. Those figures were 21 percent and 22 percent among black and Hispanic children, respectively.
Minority children were also more likely to be overusing quick-acting drugs designed to treat an asthma attack in progress: 26 percent of black children used such "rescue" inhalers on a daily basis, as did 19 percent of Hispanic children. That compared with 12 percent of white children.
The findings suggest that underuse of preventive medication may be a "significant factor" in the racial and ethnic disparities in children's rates of ER visits and hospitalization for asthma, write the researchers, led by Dr. Deidre Crocker of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta.
It is not entirely clear why the racial disparities exist, according to Crocker's team.
Even after the researchers weighed factors like family income and insurance coverage, household smoking and children's weight, race itself was still a factor in asthma control and medication use.
One potential reason, Crocker and her colleagues write, is the fact that black and Hispanic children are more likely than white children to get their medical care in an emergency room -- where prescriptions for preventive asthma medication are less likely, compared with a doctor's office.
However, they add, research also suggests that doctors may be less likely to prescribe inhaled corticosteroids to minority patients, and that minority parents tend to be more skeptical about the drugs' safety than white parents are.
Whatever the reasons for the findings, Crocker's team concludes, they show that more needs to be done to increase the use of preventive asthma medication among minority children and decrease their reliance on rescue inhalers.
The findings, published in the medical journal Chest, suggest one reason for the generally poorer asthma control among minority children.
The study found that among 1,485 asthmatic children from four U.S. states, black children were twice as likely as white children to have gone to the emergency room for an asthma attack in the past year. Overall, 39 percent of black children had visited the ER, compared with 18 percent of white children.
Hispanic children fell in between, with 24 percent of parents reporting an ER visit in the past year.
Some clues to the disparity emerged when the researchers looked at the children's medication use. Both black and Hispanic children were less likely to be taking inhaled corticosteroids -- daily medication that is recommended for preventing attacks of breathlessness and wheezing in people with persistent asthma.
Among white children, one-third had used inhaled corticosteroids in the past 3 months. Those figures were 21 percent and 22 percent among black and Hispanic children, respectively.
Minority children were also more likely to be overusing quick-acting drugs designed to treat an asthma attack in progress: 26 percent of black children used such "rescue" inhalers on a daily basis, as did 19 percent of Hispanic children. That compared with 12 percent of white children.
The findings suggest that underuse of preventive medication may be a "significant factor" in the racial and ethnic disparities in children's rates of ER visits and hospitalization for asthma, write the researchers, led by Dr. Deidre Crocker of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta.
It is not entirely clear why the racial disparities exist, according to Crocker's team.
Even after the researchers weighed factors like family income and insurance coverage, household smoking and children's weight, race itself was still a factor in asthma control and medication use.
One potential reason, Crocker and her colleagues write, is the fact that black and Hispanic children are more likely than white children to get their medical care in an emergency room -- where prescriptions for preventive asthma medication are less likely, compared with a doctor's office.
However, they add, research also suggests that doctors may be less likely to prescribe inhaled corticosteroids to minority patients, and that minority parents tend to be more skeptical about the drugs' safety than white parents are.
Whatever the reasons for the findings, Crocker's team concludes, they show that more needs to be done to increase the use of preventive asthma medication among minority children and decrease their reliance on rescue inhalers.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Ladies and Gentlemen, Introducing the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize Winner????
"For what?"
That was my response Friday when a friend tweeted me with news that President Barack Obama had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Unguarded as my words were, though, similar sentiments would soon reverberate across the land as incredulous newswatchers wondered the same question aloud. Like him or not, what exactly had Obama done during his first eight months in office to deserve what is, arguably, our species’s highest honor for reconciliation?
TIME.com writer David Von Drehle remains one of the incredulous, apparently. As he ponders next year’s Nobel, and the list of presumably more deserving recipients, the journalist has reached an odd, yet captivating, conclusion:
If the Nobel Committee ever wants to honor the force that has done the most over the past 60 years to end industrial-scale war, its members will award a Peace Prize to the bomb.
Von Drehle is not kidding in the least. In his adroitly titled, “Want Peace? Give a Nuke the Nobel,” he argues
60728-004-bcf9187dthat industrial killing was practiced by many nations in the old world without nuclear weapons. Soldiers were gassed and machine-gunned by the hundreds of thousands in the trenches of World War I, [right] when Hitler was just another corporal in the Kaiser’s army. By World War II, countries on both sides of the war used airplanes and artillery to rain death on battlefields as well as cities, until the number killed around the world was so huge that the best estimates of the total number lost diverge by some 16 million souls. The dead numbered 62 million or 78 million — somewhere in there.
So when last we saw a world without nuclear weapons, human beings were killing one another with such feverish efficiency that they couldn’t keep track of the victims to the nearest 15 million. Over three decades of industrialized war, the planet averaged about 3 million dead per year. Why did that stop happening?
It did, Von Drehle says, for one reason: Thanks to nuclear weapons,
Major powers find ways to get along because the cost of armed conflict between them has become unthinkably high.
Is Von Drehle right? It’s an old argument, that the power of the nuke is not explosive, but aversive; that no one really wants to see one go off. And although there’s exactly zero chance the Norwegians will give a Peace Prize to the Peacekeeper, the notion has got to have the inventor of dynamite—Alfred Nobel—cracking up in his grave.
Friday, October 9, 2009
REPORT: Half Of The People KILLED BY SWINE FLU Are Hispanic Or Black!!!!
During all their swine flu briefings the past few months, city and federal health officials have been virtually silent about the outsize impact the pandemic appears to be having on blacks and Hispanics.
The Centers for Disease Control alluded to the problem in a small Sept. 4 report, but only in a passing mention.
That report, an analysis of the first H1N1-related deaths among U.S. children, revealed that 33% (12 of 36) were among Hispanics. All told, half of the H1N1 children's deaths between April and August were among African-Americans and Hispanics. That's considerably more than the percentage of both groups in the population.
Since then, the total number of pediatric fatalities has reached 60, but the CDC has not issued any further ethnic and racial breakdowns on the impact of the disease. Asked about that yesterday, an agency spokesman said a new report will be ready before the end of the week.
By themselves, the childhood deaths might not seem sufficient in number to raise alarm bells.
But several recent studies from local health departments around the country suggest a broader trend is already underway in minority communities:
# Boston's Public Health Commission found that 37% of all swine flu cases in that city occurred among blacks, though the black population is only 25%. Likewise, Hispanics comprise 14% of Boston residents but one-third of all confirmed H1N1 cases. Even more disturbing, three of every four people hospitalized for the virus in Boston have been black or Hispanic.
# Chicago's Department of Public Health studied 1,500 lab-confirmed swine flu cases between late April and late July and found blacks and Hispanics were four times more likely to be hospitalized than whites.
# Oklahoma's Department of Public Health reported last week that African-American children in the state were being hospitalized for swine flu at three times the rate of white children and twice the rate of Native American children.
The higher hospitalization most likely reflects disparities in health conditions among population groups, experts say.
Asthma and obesity, for instance, are more prevalent among African-Americans and Latinos, precisely the kinds of conditions that can lead to more severe reactions to the H1N1 virus.
Low-income families also are less likely to have health insurance and more likely to delay seeking treatment until a child has to go to the emergency room.
Half the 12 Hispanic children with swine flu in the CDC study, for example, suffered a cardiac or respiratory attack before they even reached an ER.
Veteran Brooklyn pediatrician Dr.Anatoly Belilovsky suggested another possibility. More than 25% of his patients in Brooklyn's Brighton Beach area are Mexican immigrants, Belilovsky says, and many suffer from Vitamin D deficiency, which can affect the strength of a person's immune system.
Unfortunately, here in New York City, the epicenter of the nation's swine flu wave this spring, health officials have not even begun the kind of study that Boston and Chicago completed.
"We haven't had a reliable way to gather the data," Assistant Health Commissioner Geoffrey Cowley said yesterday.
Cowley's boss, Health Commissioner Tom Farley, and Deputy Mayor Linda Gibbs did show up at Montefiore Medical Center's Children's Hospital on Tuesday to kick off the city's swine flu vaccination program.
As that vaccine becomes more plentiful during the next few weeks, parents should not hesitate to have their children inoculated.
The Centers for Disease Control alluded to the problem in a small Sept. 4 report, but only in a passing mention.
That report, an analysis of the first H1N1-related deaths among U.S. children, revealed that 33% (12 of 36) were among Hispanics. All told, half of the H1N1 children's deaths between April and August were among African-Americans and Hispanics. That's considerably more than the percentage of both groups in the population.
Since then, the total number of pediatric fatalities has reached 60, but the CDC has not issued any further ethnic and racial breakdowns on the impact of the disease. Asked about that yesterday, an agency spokesman said a new report will be ready before the end of the week.
By themselves, the childhood deaths might not seem sufficient in number to raise alarm bells.
But several recent studies from local health departments around the country suggest a broader trend is already underway in minority communities:
# Boston's Public Health Commission found that 37% of all swine flu cases in that city occurred among blacks, though the black population is only 25%. Likewise, Hispanics comprise 14% of Boston residents but one-third of all confirmed H1N1 cases. Even more disturbing, three of every four people hospitalized for the virus in Boston have been black or Hispanic.
# Chicago's Department of Public Health studied 1,500 lab-confirmed swine flu cases between late April and late July and found blacks and Hispanics were four times more likely to be hospitalized than whites.
# Oklahoma's Department of Public Health reported last week that African-American children in the state were being hospitalized for swine flu at three times the rate of white children and twice the rate of Native American children.
The higher hospitalization most likely reflects disparities in health conditions among population groups, experts say.
Asthma and obesity, for instance, are more prevalent among African-Americans and Latinos, precisely the kinds of conditions that can lead to more severe reactions to the H1N1 virus.
Low-income families also are less likely to have health insurance and more likely to delay seeking treatment until a child has to go to the emergency room.
Half the 12 Hispanic children with swine flu in the CDC study, for example, suffered a cardiac or respiratory attack before they even reached an ER.
Veteran Brooklyn pediatrician Dr.Anatoly Belilovsky suggested another possibility. More than 25% of his patients in Brooklyn's Brighton Beach area are Mexican immigrants, Belilovsky says, and many suffer from Vitamin D deficiency, which can affect the strength of a person's immune system.
Unfortunately, here in New York City, the epicenter of the nation's swine flu wave this spring, health officials have not even begun the kind of study that Boston and Chicago completed.
"We haven't had a reliable way to gather the data," Assistant Health Commissioner Geoffrey Cowley said yesterday.
Cowley's boss, Health Commissioner Tom Farley, and Deputy Mayor Linda Gibbs did show up at Montefiore Medical Center's Children's Hospital on Tuesday to kick off the city's swine flu vaccination program.
As that vaccine becomes more plentiful during the next few weeks, parents should not hesitate to have their children inoculated.
TAKE FIVE!-Obama picks openly gay lawyer for ambassadorship????
President Barack Obama said Wednesday he planned to nominate an openly gay lawyer as the U.S. ambassador to New Zealand and Samoa. If confirmed by the Senate, David Huebner would become the third openly gay ambassador in U.S. history and the first pick by this administration. In a statement released from the White House, Obama said he looked forward to working with Huebner and is confident he will represent the United States well in the Pacific region.
Huebner is based in Shanghai, where he handles international arbitration and mediation cases for a U.S. firm. A graduate of Princeton University and Yale Law School, he is also the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation's general counsel and previously served on the group's board.
He also has chaired the California Law Revision Commission, served as president of the Los Angeles Quality and Productivity Commission and taught at the University of Southern California's Gould School of Law.
Obama's announcement is a gesture just days before he speaks to a gay rights fundraising dinner on Saturday and gay activists march on Washington on Sunday.
Obama's relationship with gay activists has been rocky since his election. Gays and lesbians objected to the invitation of evangelist Rev. Rick Warren's to participate in Obama's inauguration because of Warren's support for repealing gay marriage in California. Obama responded by having Episcopalian Bishop V. Gene Robinson, the denomination's first openly gay bishop, participate at another event.
As president, Obama hasn't taken any concrete steps urging Congress to rescind the Clinton-era "don't ask, don't tell" policy that allows gays and lesbians to serve in the military as long as they don't disclose their sexual orientation or act on it. Some former chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have acknowledged the policy is flawed.
The office of the current chairman, Adm. Mike Mullen, signed off on a journal article that called for lifting the ban, arguing that the military is forcing thousands of military members to live dishonest lives.
Obama also pledged during the campaign to work for repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, which limits how state, local and federal bodies can recognize partnerships and determine benefits. But lawyers in his administration defended the law in a court brief. White House aides said they were only doing their jobs to back a law that was already on the books.
Officials said Obama's slow and incremental approach to the politically charged issues has produced some gains.
"The president made commitments on those issues — not just, quite frankly, in a presidential race but ran on some of those commitments in a Senate race," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said. "They are commitments that are important to him and he is intent on making progress on those issues and is working with the Pentagon to ensure, at least in 'don't ask, don't tell,' that we make progress on it."
Obama has expanded some federal benefits to same-sex partners, but not health benefits or pension guarantees. He has allowed State Department employees to include their same-sex partners in certain embassy programs available to opposite-sex spouses.
On Wednesday, Gibbs said the administration was working with the Office of Personnel Management to expand those benefits.
But that remains far short of his campaign rhetoric.
"At its core, this issue is about who we are as Americans," Obama said a 2007 statement on gay issues. "It's about whether this nation is going to live up to its founding promise of equality by treating all its citizens with dignity and respect."
Huebner is based in Shanghai, where he handles international arbitration and mediation cases for a U.S. firm. A graduate of Princeton University and Yale Law School, he is also the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation's general counsel and previously served on the group's board.
He also has chaired the California Law Revision Commission, served as president of the Los Angeles Quality and Productivity Commission and taught at the University of Southern California's Gould School of Law.
Obama's announcement is a gesture just days before he speaks to a gay rights fundraising dinner on Saturday and gay activists march on Washington on Sunday.
Obama's relationship with gay activists has been rocky since his election. Gays and lesbians objected to the invitation of evangelist Rev. Rick Warren's to participate in Obama's inauguration because of Warren's support for repealing gay marriage in California. Obama responded by having Episcopalian Bishop V. Gene Robinson, the denomination's first openly gay bishop, participate at another event.
As president, Obama hasn't taken any concrete steps urging Congress to rescind the Clinton-era "don't ask, don't tell" policy that allows gays and lesbians to serve in the military as long as they don't disclose their sexual orientation or act on it. Some former chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have acknowledged the policy is flawed.
The office of the current chairman, Adm. Mike Mullen, signed off on a journal article that called for lifting the ban, arguing that the military is forcing thousands of military members to live dishonest lives.
Obama also pledged during the campaign to work for repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, which limits how state, local and federal bodies can recognize partnerships and determine benefits. But lawyers in his administration defended the law in a court brief. White House aides said they were only doing their jobs to back a law that was already on the books.
Officials said Obama's slow and incremental approach to the politically charged issues has produced some gains.
"The president made commitments on those issues — not just, quite frankly, in a presidential race but ran on some of those commitments in a Senate race," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said. "They are commitments that are important to him and he is intent on making progress on those issues and is working with the Pentagon to ensure, at least in 'don't ask, don't tell,' that we make progress on it."
Obama has expanded some federal benefits to same-sex partners, but not health benefits or pension guarantees. He has allowed State Department employees to include their same-sex partners in certain embassy programs available to opposite-sex spouses.
On Wednesday, Gibbs said the administration was working with the Office of Personnel Management to expand those benefits.
But that remains far short of his campaign rhetoric.
"At its core, this issue is about who we are as Americans," Obama said a 2007 statement on gay issues. "It's about whether this nation is going to live up to its founding promise of equality by treating all its citizens with dignity and respect."
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
This is what they think about you!!! Welcome to the Jungle.
You’re looking at a photo, above, of a Coral Gables, FL Barnes & Noble window display of current books about Barack and Michelle Obama, their family, and President Obama’s historic run for the White House.
Dead center, as you’ve cerainly noticed, is a book titled Monkeys.
Get it? Somebody thinks that the Obamas are monkeys. (Maybe it was Tammy Bruce?)
According to The Defenders Online, which is produced by the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund (LDF), B&N was vastly apologetic when the arrangement was pointed out, and rushed to clarify the controversy.
“This was not a company driven decision,” Edgar Chang, the store manager, said in an interview with TheDefendersOnline. “We are not sure how the book got in the window, but we believe it was put there by a customer who didn’t like the fact that Obama won the election.”
The store is located in the Miracle Mile Mall on a busy stretch of highway. The display windows face that highway. While customers walking in or by can clearly see titles in the window, somehow the store’s manager and employees did not notice the monkey book for three or four days.
“We didn’t notice that it was there,” said Chang. “Employees park in the lot in the back of the store. We just put up displays but we never go up to the windows until it’s time to change them.”
Barnes and Noble spokesperson Mary Ellen Keating said that employees were interviewed and there was a thorough investigation of the incident.
“Barnes and Noble would certainly not do something like this,” Keating said. “We put up a display to honor President Obama. Once we discovered this, four days later, it was immediately removed.”
Keating said that the store deals with similar types of pranks on any given day. From time to time customers will move titles from one area of the store to another. In a statement issued to the media Keating wrote: “I’ve seen situations where someone put a book about sex in the children’s section,” she said. “In this particular case, we do not condone whatever message may have been intended with the placement of this title in our Presidential display. It certainly was not part of our merchandising and we regret that we didn’t see the placement of this title immediately.”
This is only the latest in a series of racist associations between the Obamas and monkeys made by apparently disgruntled citizens. Some will recall the protest against a Georgia store owner who made and sold OBAMA IN ‘08 t-shirts, each sporting the sole image of children’s book character Curious George holding a banana. At a Sarah Palin rally in Johnstown, PA during the campaign, a number of media noted the presence of one man, above, grinning as he held up “a stuffed monkey doll with a Barack Obama bumper sticker wrapped across its forehead.” (Here’s footage of the man, holding a, again, Curious George doll he refers to as “Little Hussein,” “Hussein” being Barack Obama’s middle name.) There was the commemorative Obama Sock Monkey doll. Of course, the controversy over the NY Post’s “shot-dead chimp” cartoon is still fresh.
lebron-and-gorillaBeyond the Obamas, though, and in the wider culture, others will remember the LeBron James / VOGUE controversy, passionately covered on this blog and other places. There, James’s pose for photographer Annie Leibovitz’s cover photo was directly lifted from a 1917 image of a brutish, warlike gorilla, right.
At that time, however, what was often less noted in the coverage were the findings of Stanford professor Jennifer Eberhardt, working with fellow scientists from Pennsylvania State University and the University of California-Berkeley. Mere weeks before VOGUE hit the stands, they’d published a paper, based on six years of research, concluding that many Americans subconsciously associate Black people with apes.
Which suggests that, as it pertains to the Obamas, more is on the way.
Or, as I prefer to say, racism is not only historic, but futuristic.
One More Question, Mr. Hoop Star: When Your Assailant Pistol-Whipped You, Did He Mention “MTV Cribs”?
Remember that rash of NBA player home invasions that was making the news two years ago? I’ve been wondering all this week: Did MTV Cribs play a role in any of the crimes at all?
Let me explain this with a biblical illustration:
In the book of Isaiah, chapter 39, King Hezekiah of Israel is visited by Babylonian envoys who’ve heard about his wealth and power. He’s so flattered by their attention, and the distance from which they’ve come to learn more of it, that he gives them, literally, the royal tour, right. After they leave, the prophet, Isaiah, learns of this visit and, in v. 3-7 (NIV), the following occurs:
3 Then Isaiah the prophet went to King Hezekiah and asked, “What did those men say, and where did they come from?”
“From a distant land,” Hezekiah replied. “They came to me from Babylon.”
4 The prophet asked, “What did they see in your palace?”
“They saw everything in my palace,” Hezekiah said. “There is nothing among my treasures that I did not show them.”
5 Then Isaiah said to Hezekiah, “Hear the word of the LORD Almighty: 6 The time will surely come when everything in your palace, and all that your fathers have stored up until this day, will be carried off to Babylon. Nothing will be left, says the LORD. 7 And some of your descendants, your own flesh and blood who will be born to you, will be taken away, and they will become eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon.”
Of course, as it always does, the Lord’s word came true, and when the Babyloninans invade Israel, they made a beeline for the palace treasury that their spies had been shown years before.
Now, Isaiah is filled with profound meaning and instruction. But as a kid, what I took from it was this: Don’t show or tell people what you own, or have in your home.
Which brings me back to MTV Cribs, right: When you appear on the show, aren’t you, more than just your home’s contents, basically giving your house’s floor plan to anybody who decides they want to break in? I mean, down to where the furniture sits, so someone doing a home invasion wouldn’t even trip over anything in the dark?
I would never wish anything bad on the Dallas Mavericks’ Josh Howard, nor, to my knowledge, has he been the victim of such a screen7crime. But it was while watching his edition of Cribs recently, above, that what I’d been thinking about for a while sort of crystallized: All you’d need is an iPod with his Cribs episode on it—or even just crude drawings—to find all his stuff; for example, all his expensive leather jackets, stashed in the back of his cedar-lined closet, right. In part, because the entire episode is literally shot with the appearance of being one smooth, Steadicammed take, each edition, effectively, is, more than just a catalog of the house’s contents. It’s a 3D, first-person shooter-style walkthrough of the property.
I haven’t compared a list of the victimized to those who’ve appeared on Cribs, and, to my knowledge, no one whose appeared on the show has been involved in such a crime, so this hypothesis may be full of holes. Plus, I certainly don’t think I’m the first to think of this possibility, or consider it.
cnn-anchorsIn fact, I know I’m not: In 2007, message boards were full of fans hypothesizing a connection between Cribs and the murder, in his home, of Washington Redskins safety Sean Taylor. (Taylor was never featured on the show, however.) On a CNN roundtable about the death in December of that year, reporters Rick Sanchez, right, and Dan Lothian, far right, had this exchange:
SANCHEZ: You know, you and I were talking a little while ago, Dan, and I’m fascinated by this show you told me about. I don’t know what network it’s on, but it’s called “Crib”?
LOTHIAN: Right. “MTV Cribs.”
SANCHEZ: And what do they — they show their stuff off? Now, where is this world?
LOTHIAN: Exactly. Essentially, it’s inviting the cameras into your home to show them your whips, as they call them, your wheels, your cars…
SANCHEZ: Right.
LOTHIAN: They lay out their $100,000 cars, $40,000, take them into the bedroom and say, hey, look at all my jewelry. Look at all the nice, fancy things I have.
SANCHEZ: And these are athletes as well?
LOTHIAN: These are athletes, entertainers in general.
SANCHEZ: Right.
LOTHIAN: But the big problem that some of the safety experts see here is that you are really inviting troublesome sometimes, with shows like this or other reality shows, where you’re inviting the public in and you’re showing them your privacy and perhaps it might be egging someone on who might be thinking about doing some bad things.
Jemele HillThen, Jemele Hill, of ESPN.com, right—younger, closer to the street than either of the CNN heads—is brought into the conversation by satellite, and, asked to comment, adds this:
HILL: Yes. I mean, some athletes, they are flashy. And you guys mentioned, MTV Cribs. I had one NBA player, very well known. He told me that he would not — that’s the reason he wouldn’t go on “Cribs” is because he didn’t want for everybody to know what kind of cars he had, what kind of things he had in his own. And so, it’s a very real fear on their part.
But some of them as you say, they do invite trouble, hanging out in nightclubs. They have a lot of jewelry, that sort of thing. But there are also some. You know, you have to remember, we have so much public information about athletes. We know their salaries. We know how much they take home. We know where they are. We know their schedules. And a lot of ways, they’re the easiest target in the book.
And, Cribs or not, that has definitely not changed. Y’all brothers need to pack up your stuff and move.
Keep Cash Safe Inside Your Drawers.
You’ve gotta be giving somebody massively hot, amazing sex to make them even think about wanting to pick up your underwear, and if they look like the numbers here, right, I’m guessing your lovin’ ain’t that good, bud.
Shomer-Tec, long-time retailers of tools for law enforcement, probably agrees. That’s why they decided that a pair of untidy whiteys might be the world’s best place to stash some cash.
Introducing the Brief Safe,
an innovative diversion safe that can secure your cash, documents, and other small valuables from inquisitive eyes and thieving hands, both at home and when you’re traveling. Items can be hidden right under their noses with these specially-designed briefs which contain a fly-accessed 4″ x 10″ secret compartment with Velcro closure and “special markings” on the lower rear portion. Leave the “Brief Safe” in plain view in your laundry basket or washing machine at home, or in your suitcase in a hotel room - even the most hardened burgler or most curious snoop will “skid” to a screeching halt as soon as they see them. (Wouldn’t you?) Made in USA. One size. Color: white (and brown).
Get the Brief Safe, and take a load off your mind. $11.
Microsoft Introduces Its Most Advanced Application, Yet: Windows RaceChange Suite Express for Vista????
See Orlando, the one in the middle, above? He’s smiling, but, like a lot of Black people, deep down inside, he’s tired of being ignored. Passed over for promotions. Always asked to work on his company’s “ethnic marketing” campaigns.
I mean, look at him: He’s the oldest guy in his unit, because everybody who got hired when he came on has moved up. Meanwhile, Jenny, right, is team leader, and in line for the division president position. Ignore the Asian guy!
Grrrrrrrrrrr. It’s enough to infuriate a person.
Or, at least, it was. But that was before we, at Microsoft, introduced The Microsoft Advantage, courtesy of our most advanced software to-date: Windows RaceChange Suite Express for Vista.
With a few quick taps on his laptop, Orlando, above, becomes “Bob,” below.
The Blueprint Three: Behold The Trio of Books You Must Own In Order To Conquer the Modern Music Business.
When 19-year-old computer geek Shawn Fanning created and released Napster, his internet file-sharing application, 10 years ago, he had no idea that his little experiment would completely overturn the massive, multi-billion music business. He just wanted a way to share digital music with friends. But what started as an experiment by a bored college student quickly became the loose bolt that would yank the industry from its rapidly rotating axle.
Fanning and Napster were quickly lambasted by many, hailed as heroes by many more. But their story is only a small part of what Chicago Tribune music critic Greg Kot, in his new book, Ripped: How the Wired Generation Revolutionized Music, above, calls “the laptop generation”:
An uprising led by bands and fans networking on the Internet. Ripped tells the story of how the laptop generation created a new grassroots music industry, with the fans and bands rather than the corporations in charge.
Those businesses fell apart not only because the technology made change irresistible, but also because, for years, the business refused to come to grips with what was happening to their field. That’s the subject of Rolling Stone contributing editor Steve Knopper’s text, Appetite for Self-Destruction: The Rise and Fall of the Record Industry in the Digital Age, above middle. In Knopper’s opinion,
after the incredible wealth and excess of the ’80s and ’90s, Sony,
Warner, and the other big players brought about their own downfall
through years of denial and bad decisions in the face of dramatic
advances in technology.
Greg Kot and Steve Knopper are guests today on my WBAI-NY / 99.5 FM radio show, NONFICTION, this afternoon, Friday, October 2, at 2 pm ET.
But they’re talking about how we got here. What should an artist do, in today’s realm, to manage a career in the digital age? Attorney Steve Gordon’s book, The Future of the Music Business: How to Succeed with the New Digital Technologies, above top, is designed as a guide for the artist / entrepreneur who wants to take control of their career. It
provides a legal and business roadmap to artists, music industry professionals, entrepreneurs and attorneys. It focuses on the rules pertaining to the music business and the new digital music industry, how artists and entrepreneurs can use the new technologies to succeed, new business models, plus interviews with artists and entrepreneurs who are inventing the future of the music business.
You can hear Kot’s, Knopper’s, and Gordon’s ideas by tuning in at 2 pm. If you’re outside of the New York tri-state, check out our stream on the web. If you miss the live show, dig into our archives for up to 90 days after broadcast.
Sorry MTV!!!!-The Importance of Being LL!
I don’t think LL Cool J’s legacy and value to the history of hip-hop has been, in any way, seriously addressed. Delete him, and much of hip-hop history vanishes, or becomes unfathomable. LL, in a very real way, may be the GOAT.
Good point. Why exactly is Todd Smith’s contribution often ignored? Is the fact that he still releases music and movies, long after his creative and commercial peak, diminishing the value of his legacy? As the originator of the awkward (but widely adapted) GOAT tag, there’s no denying that LL Cool J was the ultimate MC. Arrogant to a fault, he went-up against the rap establishment of the day and destroyed them all. Never lost a battle. Your girl had his poster on her bedroom wall. You had his tape in your Walkman. Laid the blueprint for combining ’street’ records with broad-baiting chart toppers. Had the stones to kick Champagne Rap years before it became trendy….hold up. That’s a plus? Let’s not forget the ugly part of Cool J’s legacy either – he also made a career of ‘artistic compromise’. He was kicking ‘I Want You’ and ‘I Can Give You More’ to the dames on Radio, but the drum machine was still knocking in the background, but that ‘I Need Love’ shit? There was a reason he got booed off stage under a hail of coins from betrayed hardcore b-boys in the UK. In retrospect it seems like a stroke of marketing genius, but try explaining that to a kid who had memorized every line of ‘Rock The Bells’.
LL is the reason that so many admire Jay-Z’s ability to mix hardcore, club and pop records on any given album. A purists nightmare who recorded some of the rawest examples of pure lyrically wizardry every set to a beat. Did what he had to in order to survive in the shark-infested waters of the music industry, and we loved to hate him for it. Even Mama Said Knock You Out, which contains blood-thirsty burners such as ‘Murdergram’ and ‘To Da Break of Dawn’ is littered with the usual Cool J lover man jams that no red-blooded male would ever be caught dead blasting out their car window. But how can you deny the stripes of a kid who literally had thirty garbage bags full of rhymes that he’d penned while he still in high school? Who still came out his grandma’s house even though every tough guy in Queens was gunning for him ‘cos he winked at their shorty? And who, at the height of his game, was without a shadow of a doubt the best rapper in the world.
It’s easy to blame Uncle L for many of today’s unfortunate trends – rapper’s who want to act, rapper’s who hate wearing shirts and rapper’s who love hats, but there are just as many standards that he set that have sadly been allowed to fall by the wayside. Things like advanced vocabularies.
Silver Fox, who mentored LL that summer before he signed with Def Jam, explained another aspect of the Cool J phenomenon:
‘All the old school rappers were getting older, and there was a new generation that were buying records – and you don’t want to buy a record that your dad’s making, right? And L opened up the door for a lotta these young cats to start coming out. Before there was a Will Smith, there was LL! What I love about L, man – his first album, there wasn’t a curse word on it! Wait, maybe one song [laughs] He did ‘Jack The Ripper’ – that was the baddest! Wasn’t no cursing, no talking about slinging your drugs. He didn’t talk about what kind of gold he had on – he just wore it! He didn’t talk about his watch – he just let you see it!’
That all seems like such a long time ago…actually, it was. While having a sit-com and writing fitness books might do wonders for his image with mainstream America, LL’s extra-curricular activities have gradually diminished his brand as a Top 10 Dead-Or Alive MC. Do you need to be gunned-down in your prime or become a multi-millionaire in order to be in consideration for the upper-tier of Greatest MC’s lists?
Is Jay-Z The Shakespeare of Hip-Hop????
So I was listening to some AM radio in the car for some reason (i.e. my ipod battery ran out) and caught the last part of a conversation with Adam Bradley, an Associate Professor of Literature at the University of Colorado who wrote a book called Book of Rhymes about the connection between rap and poetry. Hardly the most exciting premise, but after enduring the usual bullshit about the difference between rap and hip-hop he was actually posed a decent question by the interviewer, which resulted in this jewel being dropped:
Who is the contemporary Shakespeare of the rap world?
Adam Bradley: It’s a heavy mantle for anyone to bare, but I think the one who could probably do it the best would be Jay-Z – and I say that both for the longevity of his career but also the range of his subject matter. As he’s evolved as an individual his music has evolved to reflect that. So while he was rhyming on his first album about street life, about dealing drugs, about all kinds of nefarious activities, on his latest album he’s rhyming about being married to Beyonce, he’s rhyming about life as a mogul, as an entrepreneur. As a visionary in business as well as music. So that kind of breadth, that kind of development, I think is a sign of an artist who is willing to grow. Willing to grow even past his own popularity, past the time when people expect a particular thing of him – and yet he finds new ways of appealing to a new public, and that’s precisely what Shakespeare did if you look across his body of work. He never stayed the same. Whether it’s tragedies or histories or comedies, he’s always shifting and expanding.
Sure, I may not be the president of the Hova Stan Club but I have to admit that the Prof. has a pretty strong case. Don’t forget, William Shakespeare wasn’t highbrow in his day – he was penning the stage equivalents of Summer blockbusters, knocking out those hits. But it wasn’t until years after his death that he was declared to be “the greatest writer in the English language…Shakespeare was never revered in his lifetime, but he received his share of praise”. S. Carter may never make a song as great as ‘Halftime’, but – like it or not – history may just prove him to be the G.O.A.T. after all.
TAKE FIVE! PART II: THE SOLUTION TO THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM????
That's the solution? Many people might think, jokingly, that Big Blak's solution to the educational system is to wire each building up state by state, city by city, wire them up with high powered explosives on down to one radio programmed button, and stand somewhere far off and press the button, several times.
Fortunately, I am a civilized individual. I found out a way in which we can permanently do away with ignorance once and for all. But the revolution is not about us running down the street shooting at the enemy, or shooting at who we think is the enemy.
Remember, we are all afflicted with CSDS. Keep in mind, when you wish to change anything, the revolution starts in the mind. Change the way you think and you will change the environment around you. It is that simple. Look in the mirror and change what you see there, first before anything else.
But, to all teachers, principals and deans, I urge you all to analyze your tired, boring techniques of teaching and learning and develop a more modernized system; not for my own self-gratification but to save your own life from your own students. Nothing I say in these writings are lies. Nothing I say in these writings are irrational. You have lost control of your students due to an outdated educational system. Students of all grades are very advanced because they live in a very advanced environment. Why hasn't the educational system advanced with them?
Adding computers and younger teachers to the classroom, isn't advancement. Advancement for humans is learning the techniques for advancing humanity. The educational system presently teaches students how to be American, not Human.
Understand this point, before you are a race, a religion or an occupation, you are a human being. This should be the first lesson studied in all classrooms or, there should be a course from kindergarten on up to college on humanism. One of your subjects should be humanism, if you are a human being and must exist amongst other human beings.
But in order to solve the problem of the educational system, we must dig up the roots of the educational system and its roots lie in slavery. Slavery is only half abolished. Most slaves couldn't read or write or count. They were property of those who could read, write and count. Ultimately, being educated and being free from bondage is the end of slavery.
As long as you aren't educated, you still have half the characteristics of a slave. A slave, knew only a little of his culture. How much more of our culture do we know today?
Sportspersons, recording artists., etc., are forms of slaves; you are owned, bought and sold, simple. Men with votes and no education are still slaves.
How can you abolish an act without improving or correcting the wrong done by the act? That's like saying we have a cure for the disease, so the disease is abolished, but all the people that have been affected by the disease won't get the cure. They'll be told of the cure.
That's what the Emancipation Proclamation was. They ended the physical concept of slavery, but not the psychological or physical concept of the slave.
This is the root in dealing with the edcuational system. We must understand where such a system came from. And we must understand who benefits from the system or who has been benefiting from the system and who has not been benefiting from the system. If two men start on a race, but one is a mile ahead of the other one, of course they will not end up at the finish line together. This is the problem, with education in America.
We shall now begin to correct certain history you've been taught, just this brief bit of history, the part about the slave being free. There is no such thing as freedom for a slave.
The Emancipation Proclamation declared that on January 1, 1863, "All persons held as slaves within a state or part of state in armed rebellion were declared free." So when the war ended in 1865, America had no businesses, no way to make money, because before the war cotton and other plantation products were the main base of its technology. When the Civil War broke out, money was made on war. When the war was over, America's economy was lost. White men were starving. So a million and a half slaves went back into slavery due to America's economy and the miseducation of the slave.
Again, Lincoln never freed anyone. Let me say that again, Lincoln never freed anyone because of one simple fact: how can you free a slave?
Lincoln clearly said, "I freed the slaves." How can you free a slave? Lincoln did not go to a land called "Slaves" and get slaves. Lincoln and some of his ancestors went to Africa and got Africans. The contract should read, "I now free the African man and woman all over the nation" It did not read this, it said, "I free the slave" which means, "I see you as a slave so you'll always be a slave, and I free you as a slave."
Slave! The only reason why we are not whipped and forced to work for nothing now is because of technology. Technology advanced as so did the job of the slave. But the educational system fails to realize or refuses to realize that if you do not teach a man or woman their culture, they are insane to themselves. And when they become insane to themselves, obviously, they are crazy, and their actions seem just. They act insane to their own humanity, they do not know themselves.
We need to teach people their culture, get people back on their track. Get Africans, Europeans, Asians and Americans (this means the people that are indigenous to America) back on track. Everyone needs to know African history because African history is the world's history. Everyone needs to know European history, everyone needs to know Asian history and real American history in order for everyone to understand everyone.
Lincoln did not free the slaves. Lincoln tried to end the physical concept of slavery, but the psychological concept of the slave was never freed. The psychological concept of the slave is that the slave could not read, the slave could not write, the slave could not count. Therefore, the slave did not know his culture.
How much more of our culture do we know today? We don't even speak our own language. We don't even wear our own clothes. We don't even wear our hair the same way we used to wear our hair. We are not ourselves anymore, due to our education.
The education in America must be modified. And in order to modify the education in America, we must know the truth about slavery. We must know the truth about the effects of slavery because we are reaping those effects right now, in this century, in this decade, in this month, in this day. Keep in mind, there were whites that did not have slaves but believed in slavery or there were whites that didn't have slaves but believed that slavery was justified according to their Herronvoke democracy theory, which was the belief in equal superiority of all who believed in the Herronvoke, the master race.
The Herronvolke (German word for: master race) concept had power appeal in both the North and the South. William L. Yancy, a Southern rights champion states, "Your fathers and my fathers built this government on two ideas. The first is that the White race is the citizen and the master race and the White man is equal to every other white man. The second is that the Negro is the inferior race.
The Declaration of Independence, in this interpretation, affirms that all White men were created equal. The man who wrote that declaration was a slave holder, President Andrew Jackson. And the Jacksonian democrats aggressively championed White Supremacy.
Their Herronvolke ideology helped attract Irish and unskilled workers in the North to the Democratic Party, for it proclaimed, "No matter how poor you might be, you are still better than Blacks." Just like the southern slave holders, they feared the Emancipation Proclamation because it would render their whiteness, meaningless.
Governor Wise of Virginia said, "Break down slavery and you would with the same blow destroy the democratic principal of equality amongst men." The South was for slavery because of economics and the North was for White supremacy. Both hated the African.
The South was known to be more paranoid of Black people because of the revolts of Nat Turner.
Lincoln made it clear on July 4, 1861, that he had no purpose directly or indirectly to interfere with slavery. That war was fought to uphold the constitution that protected slavery. The Union fought for the constitution not for the freedom of the African. On August 22, 1862, Lincoln said, "My paramount objective in this struggle is to save the Union and is not eager to save or destroy slavery. If I can save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do that. And if I could save it by freeing all of the slaves, I would do that," and it goes on. So the war turned into a fight for freedom to save the Union or the Constitution.
This is the ultimate form of ignorance. This is what the educational system has been built on. This ideology and this concept is what we are experiencing right now in 1992. But sadly enough, even the principals, deans, students, and teachers of all grades and all colors and all creeds have not realized this because it was even hidden from them.
The educational system must be modified. The educational system must be uprooted and it must be redone. We are living in a very advanced age and the educational system has not advanced with the age. The educational system presently needs to be modified. This is the only solution to the educational system on a whole. You must understand where it came from, how it was put into place and who taught who what.
Fortunately, I am a civilized individual. I found out a way in which we can permanently do away with ignorance once and for all. But the revolution is not about us running down the street shooting at the enemy, or shooting at who we think is the enemy.
Remember, we are all afflicted with CSDS. Keep in mind, when you wish to change anything, the revolution starts in the mind. Change the way you think and you will change the environment around you. It is that simple. Look in the mirror and change what you see there, first before anything else.
But, to all teachers, principals and deans, I urge you all to analyze your tired, boring techniques of teaching and learning and develop a more modernized system; not for my own self-gratification but to save your own life from your own students. Nothing I say in these writings are lies. Nothing I say in these writings are irrational. You have lost control of your students due to an outdated educational system. Students of all grades are very advanced because they live in a very advanced environment. Why hasn't the educational system advanced with them?
Adding computers and younger teachers to the classroom, isn't advancement. Advancement for humans is learning the techniques for advancing humanity. The educational system presently teaches students how to be American, not Human.
Understand this point, before you are a race, a religion or an occupation, you are a human being. This should be the first lesson studied in all classrooms or, there should be a course from kindergarten on up to college on humanism. One of your subjects should be humanism, if you are a human being and must exist amongst other human beings.
But in order to solve the problem of the educational system, we must dig up the roots of the educational system and its roots lie in slavery. Slavery is only half abolished. Most slaves couldn't read or write or count. They were property of those who could read, write and count. Ultimately, being educated and being free from bondage is the end of slavery.
As long as you aren't educated, you still have half the characteristics of a slave. A slave, knew only a little of his culture. How much more of our culture do we know today?
Sportspersons, recording artists., etc., are forms of slaves; you are owned, bought and sold, simple. Men with votes and no education are still slaves.
How can you abolish an act without improving or correcting the wrong done by the act? That's like saying we have a cure for the disease, so the disease is abolished, but all the people that have been affected by the disease won't get the cure. They'll be told of the cure.
That's what the Emancipation Proclamation was. They ended the physical concept of slavery, but not the psychological or physical concept of the slave.
This is the root in dealing with the edcuational system. We must understand where such a system came from. And we must understand who benefits from the system or who has been benefiting from the system and who has not been benefiting from the system. If two men start on a race, but one is a mile ahead of the other one, of course they will not end up at the finish line together. This is the problem, with education in America.
We shall now begin to correct certain history you've been taught, just this brief bit of history, the part about the slave being free. There is no such thing as freedom for a slave.
The Emancipation Proclamation declared that on January 1, 1863, "All persons held as slaves within a state or part of state in armed rebellion were declared free." So when the war ended in 1865, America had no businesses, no way to make money, because before the war cotton and other plantation products were the main base of its technology. When the Civil War broke out, money was made on war. When the war was over, America's economy was lost. White men were starving. So a million and a half slaves went back into slavery due to America's economy and the miseducation of the slave.
Again, Lincoln never freed anyone. Let me say that again, Lincoln never freed anyone because of one simple fact: how can you free a slave?
Lincoln clearly said, "I freed the slaves." How can you free a slave? Lincoln did not go to a land called "Slaves" and get slaves. Lincoln and some of his ancestors went to Africa and got Africans. The contract should read, "I now free the African man and woman all over the nation" It did not read this, it said, "I free the slave" which means, "I see you as a slave so you'll always be a slave, and I free you as a slave."
Slave! The only reason why we are not whipped and forced to work for nothing now is because of technology. Technology advanced as so did the job of the slave. But the educational system fails to realize or refuses to realize that if you do not teach a man or woman their culture, they are insane to themselves. And when they become insane to themselves, obviously, they are crazy, and their actions seem just. They act insane to their own humanity, they do not know themselves.
We need to teach people their culture, get people back on their track. Get Africans, Europeans, Asians and Americans (this means the people that are indigenous to America) back on track. Everyone needs to know African history because African history is the world's history. Everyone needs to know European history, everyone needs to know Asian history and real American history in order for everyone to understand everyone.
Lincoln did not free the slaves. Lincoln tried to end the physical concept of slavery, but the psychological concept of the slave was never freed. The psychological concept of the slave is that the slave could not read, the slave could not write, the slave could not count. Therefore, the slave did not know his culture.
How much more of our culture do we know today? We don't even speak our own language. We don't even wear our own clothes. We don't even wear our hair the same way we used to wear our hair. We are not ourselves anymore, due to our education.
The education in America must be modified. And in order to modify the education in America, we must know the truth about slavery. We must know the truth about the effects of slavery because we are reaping those effects right now, in this century, in this decade, in this month, in this day. Keep in mind, there were whites that did not have slaves but believed in slavery or there were whites that didn't have slaves but believed that slavery was justified according to their Herronvoke democracy theory, which was the belief in equal superiority of all who believed in the Herronvoke, the master race.
The Herronvolke (German word for: master race) concept had power appeal in both the North and the South. William L. Yancy, a Southern rights champion states, "Your fathers and my fathers built this government on two ideas. The first is that the White race is the citizen and the master race and the White man is equal to every other white man. The second is that the Negro is the inferior race.
The Declaration of Independence, in this interpretation, affirms that all White men were created equal. The man who wrote that declaration was a slave holder, President Andrew Jackson. And the Jacksonian democrats aggressively championed White Supremacy.
Their Herronvolke ideology helped attract Irish and unskilled workers in the North to the Democratic Party, for it proclaimed, "No matter how poor you might be, you are still better than Blacks." Just like the southern slave holders, they feared the Emancipation Proclamation because it would render their whiteness, meaningless.
Governor Wise of Virginia said, "Break down slavery and you would with the same blow destroy the democratic principal of equality amongst men." The South was for slavery because of economics and the North was for White supremacy. Both hated the African.
The South was known to be more paranoid of Black people because of the revolts of Nat Turner.
Lincoln made it clear on July 4, 1861, that he had no purpose directly or indirectly to interfere with slavery. That war was fought to uphold the constitution that protected slavery. The Union fought for the constitution not for the freedom of the African. On August 22, 1862, Lincoln said, "My paramount objective in this struggle is to save the Union and is not eager to save or destroy slavery. If I can save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do that. And if I could save it by freeing all of the slaves, I would do that," and it goes on. So the war turned into a fight for freedom to save the Union or the Constitution.
This is the ultimate form of ignorance. This is what the educational system has been built on. This ideology and this concept is what we are experiencing right now in 1992. But sadly enough, even the principals, deans, students, and teachers of all grades and all colors and all creeds have not realized this because it was even hidden from them.
The educational system must be modified. The educational system must be uprooted and it must be redone. We are living in a very advanced age and the educational system has not advanced with the age. The educational system presently needs to be modified. This is the only solution to the educational system on a whole. You must understand where it came from, how it was put into place and who taught who what.
TAKE FIVE! PART I: MODIFYING THE EDUCATION IN AMERICA!
Before you are a race, religion or occupation you are a human being, the greatest of all animals. The dumbest, most ignorant thing said, is, 'I'm only human.' Statements like these, demean, lessen and cut down the true existence of being human.
Now, if you wish to exist as a cat or a dog or a goat or any other animal other than human, this book isn't for you. But, if you are constantly going to take pride in calling yourself a human being, then you should act accordingly.
The barbaric educational system teaches anti-humanism; they'll make you believe that you can have human rights without human duties. There are actually things that the human being must do in order to manifest as human. One of those things is thinking.
The human being must think in order to survive. We can't breathe under water, we can't fly, nor can we run fast, so we've got to think in order to survive. When you tamper with a bird's wings you mess up its daily life, likewise for the human; when you tamper with a human's mind you mess up its daily life. The barbaric educational system, tampers with the process of thinking with labels, symbols, letters, numbers and accumulated lies. So humanism is never achieved, because the human being must think to survive.
Example, when you go to school, they give the answer to all your questions. Two or three months later they test you on if you remember the answer or not; this is not thinking, this is memorizing. And when you go through your entire life using memory and not intellect, any problem that you're confronted with that you don't remember how to deal with, you can't deal with. Mainly because you don't remember how to deal with it. Ultimately you become trapped, you can't move because you don't remember how to move. The barbaric educational system is based on memorizing lies.
One of the first signs of intelligence in any human is asking questions, then debating answers. But if you never get to ask a question, how can you debate any answer. Some people might say in school, "Yeah you can ask questions in school," wrong, you only ask about what you can remember to ask about. The entire system is based on memory, not intellect.
For example, everyone knows Christopher Columbus did not discover America, he killed and robbed and destroyed the indigenous populations or the Indians of America. But to pass your class, you'll put down on paper, Christopher Columbus discovered America, knowing this is a lie. It seems as though the grade of A+, B or C is greater in significance than actually having the facts.
This is barbaric and backwards. If your teacher was to ask you, 'What is American history?' And you told the teacher kidnap, murder and theft, in addition to some other good things, you would fail your class even though it's the truth. Ultimately this is a crime.
When birds can't fly, fish can't swim, and human's can't think, we've been tricked and blind-folded to our own human consciousness. We have been tricked into the consciousness of "me, myself and I," and "it's all about me."
These statements are self-destructive because humans can only progress around other humans in a human environment. The anti-human is headed for self-destruction while the human being is headed for self-construction.
There can be individual groups of human beings but anti-humans are groups of individuals. The true manifestation of the human being is to serve humanity. The true manifestation of the anti-human is humanity serving one human.
The human being gets worked on in three ways; politically, educationally and religiously. Keep in mind, the religious system and the educational system come out of the political system. First they take your land, then they take your mind, then they take your soul and the human being is made a slave.
People with Ph.D.s, Psychological Human Disorders, usually administer what we have coined as CSDS, Common Sense Deficiency Syndrome. All of humanity is afflicted with this illness. Before any illness, CSDS is the first illness.
Before you contract any disease, first you lose your common sense. Before you wrap your lips around the crack pipe, first you lose your common sense. CSDS blocks our rational thinking and has you thinking in an irrational way, due to a lack of common sense.
Without common sense, correct thinking is impossible. And when correct thinking turns into incorrect thinking, what follows is incorrect anti-human beast-like actions.
No one in school is studying intellectualism (the science of Human intellect). As we pointed out, school is a system of memory, the question is where did such a system come from and why?
If you don't know the history of the author of a book, you don't know the book. You're only reading 50% of the book when you don't have the history of the author.
For example, I could be an author that is also a murderer of white women but if I never told you in my book, you would never know. The question is, what if I wrote the Bible and you're living my laws because I told you I was inspired by God - or - what if I was a racist and hated most races especially the African race, at the same time I was an archaeologist looking for the original man. If I'm a racist, I'll never look in Africa for the original man because I don't respect African people. I'm going to look in Europe and Australia and teach the world scientifically that the European is the original man, especially if I'm European. This egotistically makes me the superior man. If your teacher is a murderer, you'll learn to be one too.
The school system teaches kids how to steal, murder and hate one another and the school yards are the practice grounds for these thoughts. The individual actions of principals, teachers, deans, etc., is unimportant when compared to the educational system as a whole. The educational system of learning is old, it does not satisfy the human consciousness of this day and age.
Let's look at the English language. The nature of the English language is theft. It's a language that steals from other languages to create its own language and style, any English teacher should know that!
English, mathematics, science, art, history, etc., etc., including lunch has been stolen. If you notice, when thieves steal things like computers but fail to study computer science, all they can do is maybe punch up their names, turn it on, or turn it off. They'll never get the full benefit from that computer, because they didn't have knowledge of what they stole.
The same formula applies with the history of the educational system. Most of the subjects we study have been stolen from Africa and Asia and other parts of the world. The thieves are teaching you their own ignorance. (For more information on who stole from who, check out Stolen Legacy by George M. James.)
The dumbest public argument was the whole censorship issue in 1990. Everyone asked all types of questions like, "Why are you so explicit? What is art? What is obscenity? Etc., etc., etc., there is too much violence in movies and this and that and the other." No one asked the question, "Who taught the masses to respect sex and violence?"
Women go to rock concerts in the thousands to be called bitches, sluts, hoes. They'll even buy recordings of the artist of their choice, and be called bitches in the privacy of there own home. They've been taught to feel like bitches, but they don't actually want to be bitches. So their idea of letting go at the end of a day is being called "BITCH!" at a very high volume. They know they're not bitches, but for a $20 concert ticket they'll put away their common sense and allow themselves to morally, subconsciously and in most cases, physically screwed on stage and off. This is CSDS!
Who taught the masses of the people that watching other people die is entertainment or that feeling terrified in front of a screen is a nice way to spend the evening with a loved one. First, we must cure the common sense so that we can have intellect and not only memory.
Memory is a good tool of the intellect and intellect is a good tool of common sense. If our recording artists are explicit, someone had to teach them how to be explicit. Being obscene or explicit isn't something like sight or hearing. It isn't something you were born with.
You must be introduced to obscenity to even know it exists. Then you must be taught obscenity. Then obscenity must be put into practice. The same concept applies to being racist.
For example, you can have a European two year old, an Asian two year old, an African two year old and an Indian two year old all playing in a room filled with toys. Let's say the Asian child's mother comes in the room and says, "O.K. Bobby it's time to leave." He'll fight his mother to continue playing with his African, European and Indian friends.
What happens when you go to school is you are stripped of your common sense. Without common sense they can tell you Jesus was white and you'll agree. It doesn't matter what color Jesus was until you change the color. When you do things like this you kill humanity and any hope for civilization.
For any group of people to progress they must be in touch with the teachings of their ancestors. If all you see is your ancestors in chains as slaves, you'll follow that pattern of slavery subconsciously. When a race of people can't refer to the wisdom of their ancestors they repeat the same mistakes, thus hindering any progress for civilization. We must have history to move forward.
Many of us have been tricked into believing that we are living in a civilization as civilized human beings. Wrong!
Civilization hasn't even begun yet. Civilization is an advanced stage in social development. Technology, is the science of mechanical and industrial arts, it is not civilization.
Just because we have fast cars, boats, planes, we could go to the moon, we have medicine, this does not make us civilized. Being civilized implies being human. The true purpose of the human is to serve humanity. If you are not working for the advancement of humanity, you are anti-human.
Educational systems that administer false history and psychologically degrading history, are teaching anti-humanism. These systems must be modified.
Now, if you wish to exist as a cat or a dog or a goat or any other animal other than human, this book isn't for you. But, if you are constantly going to take pride in calling yourself a human being, then you should act accordingly.
The barbaric educational system teaches anti-humanism; they'll make you believe that you can have human rights without human duties. There are actually things that the human being must do in order to manifest as human. One of those things is thinking.
The human being must think in order to survive. We can't breathe under water, we can't fly, nor can we run fast, so we've got to think in order to survive. When you tamper with a bird's wings you mess up its daily life, likewise for the human; when you tamper with a human's mind you mess up its daily life. The barbaric educational system, tampers with the process of thinking with labels, symbols, letters, numbers and accumulated lies. So humanism is never achieved, because the human being must think to survive.
Example, when you go to school, they give the answer to all your questions. Two or three months later they test you on if you remember the answer or not; this is not thinking, this is memorizing. And when you go through your entire life using memory and not intellect, any problem that you're confronted with that you don't remember how to deal with, you can't deal with. Mainly because you don't remember how to deal with it. Ultimately you become trapped, you can't move because you don't remember how to move. The barbaric educational system is based on memorizing lies.
One of the first signs of intelligence in any human is asking questions, then debating answers. But if you never get to ask a question, how can you debate any answer. Some people might say in school, "Yeah you can ask questions in school," wrong, you only ask about what you can remember to ask about. The entire system is based on memory, not intellect.
For example, everyone knows Christopher Columbus did not discover America, he killed and robbed and destroyed the indigenous populations or the Indians of America. But to pass your class, you'll put down on paper, Christopher Columbus discovered America, knowing this is a lie. It seems as though the grade of A+, B or C is greater in significance than actually having the facts.
This is barbaric and backwards. If your teacher was to ask you, 'What is American history?' And you told the teacher kidnap, murder and theft, in addition to some other good things, you would fail your class even though it's the truth. Ultimately this is a crime.
When birds can't fly, fish can't swim, and human's can't think, we've been tricked and blind-folded to our own human consciousness. We have been tricked into the consciousness of "me, myself and I," and "it's all about me."
These statements are self-destructive because humans can only progress around other humans in a human environment. The anti-human is headed for self-destruction while the human being is headed for self-construction.
There can be individual groups of human beings but anti-humans are groups of individuals. The true manifestation of the human being is to serve humanity. The true manifestation of the anti-human is humanity serving one human.
The human being gets worked on in three ways; politically, educationally and religiously. Keep in mind, the religious system and the educational system come out of the political system. First they take your land, then they take your mind, then they take your soul and the human being is made a slave.
People with Ph.D.s, Psychological Human Disorders, usually administer what we have coined as CSDS, Common Sense Deficiency Syndrome. All of humanity is afflicted with this illness. Before any illness, CSDS is the first illness.
Before you contract any disease, first you lose your common sense. Before you wrap your lips around the crack pipe, first you lose your common sense. CSDS blocks our rational thinking and has you thinking in an irrational way, due to a lack of common sense.
Without common sense, correct thinking is impossible. And when correct thinking turns into incorrect thinking, what follows is incorrect anti-human beast-like actions.
No one in school is studying intellectualism (the science of Human intellect). As we pointed out, school is a system of memory, the question is where did such a system come from and why?
If you don't know the history of the author of a book, you don't know the book. You're only reading 50% of the book when you don't have the history of the author.
For example, I could be an author that is also a murderer of white women but if I never told you in my book, you would never know. The question is, what if I wrote the Bible and you're living my laws because I told you I was inspired by God - or - what if I was a racist and hated most races especially the African race, at the same time I was an archaeologist looking for the original man. If I'm a racist, I'll never look in Africa for the original man because I don't respect African people. I'm going to look in Europe and Australia and teach the world scientifically that the European is the original man, especially if I'm European. This egotistically makes me the superior man. If your teacher is a murderer, you'll learn to be one too.
The school system teaches kids how to steal, murder and hate one another and the school yards are the practice grounds for these thoughts. The individual actions of principals, teachers, deans, etc., is unimportant when compared to the educational system as a whole. The educational system of learning is old, it does not satisfy the human consciousness of this day and age.
Let's look at the English language. The nature of the English language is theft. It's a language that steals from other languages to create its own language and style, any English teacher should know that!
English, mathematics, science, art, history, etc., etc., including lunch has been stolen. If you notice, when thieves steal things like computers but fail to study computer science, all they can do is maybe punch up their names, turn it on, or turn it off. They'll never get the full benefit from that computer, because they didn't have knowledge of what they stole.
The same formula applies with the history of the educational system. Most of the subjects we study have been stolen from Africa and Asia and other parts of the world. The thieves are teaching you their own ignorance. (For more information on who stole from who, check out Stolen Legacy by George M. James.)
The dumbest public argument was the whole censorship issue in 1990. Everyone asked all types of questions like, "Why are you so explicit? What is art? What is obscenity? Etc., etc., etc., there is too much violence in movies and this and that and the other." No one asked the question, "Who taught the masses to respect sex and violence?"
Women go to rock concerts in the thousands to be called bitches, sluts, hoes. They'll even buy recordings of the artist of their choice, and be called bitches in the privacy of there own home. They've been taught to feel like bitches, but they don't actually want to be bitches. So their idea of letting go at the end of a day is being called "BITCH!" at a very high volume. They know they're not bitches, but for a $20 concert ticket they'll put away their common sense and allow themselves to morally, subconsciously and in most cases, physically screwed on stage and off. This is CSDS!
Who taught the masses of the people that watching other people die is entertainment or that feeling terrified in front of a screen is a nice way to spend the evening with a loved one. First, we must cure the common sense so that we can have intellect and not only memory.
Memory is a good tool of the intellect and intellect is a good tool of common sense. If our recording artists are explicit, someone had to teach them how to be explicit. Being obscene or explicit isn't something like sight or hearing. It isn't something you were born with.
You must be introduced to obscenity to even know it exists. Then you must be taught obscenity. Then obscenity must be put into practice. The same concept applies to being racist.
For example, you can have a European two year old, an Asian two year old, an African two year old and an Indian two year old all playing in a room filled with toys. Let's say the Asian child's mother comes in the room and says, "O.K. Bobby it's time to leave." He'll fight his mother to continue playing with his African, European and Indian friends.
What happens when you go to school is you are stripped of your common sense. Without common sense they can tell you Jesus was white and you'll agree. It doesn't matter what color Jesus was until you change the color. When you do things like this you kill humanity and any hope for civilization.
For any group of people to progress they must be in touch with the teachings of their ancestors. If all you see is your ancestors in chains as slaves, you'll follow that pattern of slavery subconsciously. When a race of people can't refer to the wisdom of their ancestors they repeat the same mistakes, thus hindering any progress for civilization. We must have history to move forward.
Many of us have been tricked into believing that we are living in a civilization as civilized human beings. Wrong!
Civilization hasn't even begun yet. Civilization is an advanced stage in social development. Technology, is the science of mechanical and industrial arts, it is not civilization.
Just because we have fast cars, boats, planes, we could go to the moon, we have medicine, this does not make us civilized. Being civilized implies being human. The true purpose of the human is to serve humanity. If you are not working for the advancement of humanity, you are anti-human.
Educational systems that administer false history and psychologically degrading history, are teaching anti-humanism. These systems must be modified.
Monday, October 5, 2009
TAKE FIVE! DISGUSTING!!! PROMINENT BLACK JUDGE ACCUSED OF FORCING MEN TO DO FREAKY STUFF ... IN EXCHANGE FOR LENIENT SENTENCES!!!
Pitch Blak has some disturbing news. Alabama Circuit Judge Herman Thomas was one of the most respected judges in the State of Alabama - but now hes got a scandal on his hands.
Pitch Blak learned that that creepy looking dude was indicted on charges that he forced male inmates to have oral and anal sex with him in exchange for leniency. He’s also been accused of bringing male inmates into his office and spanking them with a paddle.
This pervert’s trial starts today - we’ll let you know what happens when its over ...
Saturday, October 3, 2009
TAKE FIVE-11 Reasons He Dumped You!!!!
I was flipping through a Women's Health recently (I admit it), and I noticed an interesting poll. Women cited the following as the most common breakup reasons:
* He changed
* We weren't compatible
* He cheated on me
When I was little, it drove me crazy when my parents supported "no" with "because I said so." I always wanted a reason. I'm not sure if knowing why always helps, but perhaps if you know common reasons guys break up with girls, you'll at least be able to see it coming. So, here are mine:
I Got Bored: I've read many different hypotheses on attention span, but my favorite is (Wikipedia):
"Continuous attention span, or the amount of time a human can focus on an object without any lapse at all, is very brief and may be as short as 8 seconds. After this amount of time, it is likely that an individual's eyes will shift focus, or that a stray thought will briefly enter consciousness."
My attention span (unless it's a football game or a song) may be worse. I know a relationship is not supposed to be exciting all the time, so getting through those flatline moments between the sparks is critical. If I start having more fun with other activities, the relationship is doomed.
One of Us Was Too Serious: This could be as simple as she wanted to see me three times a week, and I only wanted to see her once a week. If she's flirting with other guys, flighty, or not as into it as I am, then I'm too serious for her.
Burnout: I'm a big believer in pacing and rhythm in dating. A relationship can suffer burnout if certain milestones occur too fast: Being exclusive, sex, meeting parents. When that happens, I get that feeling the colonists must have gotten after they won the Revolutionary War: "Ok, we did it...so now what?"
I Was Tempted To Cheat: I do my best not to cheat, so when I have recurring urges to cheat on my girlfriend, I figure it's time to break up with her. I don't need to go through with cheating; the constant urge is enough for me to end things.
All My Friends Broke Up With Their Girlfriends: This is by far the most immature reason on this list. While my girlfriend and I are curled up on the couch watching "The Devil Wears Prada," my newly single guy friends are out shredding the karaoke waves with Journey's "Don't Stop Believin" and tearing up the town. That conflict gives me wanderlust. It's much easier when we are all in for a quiet Saturday night with the significant others.
Divergent Lives: If someone moves to another town, or work is taking over, or other life changes are driving you apart, sometimes it's best to end it.
Feeling Selfish: Dating is selfless because you're giving your time and yourself up to a relationship. "Me time" is necessary at some point to work on career/living situation, travel, or whatever. When I'm in a "selfish period," it's tough to participate in a relationship.
I "Misread" My Feelings: This is the most unfair of all the reasons. Both genders make this mistake—you get into a relationship and everything seems so great. Then, a few weeks later, you realize you got wrapped up in something for the wrong reason, dated for the sake of dating, or whatever, and you need to get out.
My Friends Or Family Didn't Like Her: I pay close attention to friend/family opinions because they know me best, and they've earned the right to have their say. Also, friends and family may be able to see things inside the relationship that I'm too blinded to see.
I Took Her For Granted: Great relationships should be easy, but there has to be some tension too—especially in the beginning. If it's too easy, there's a lack of challenge. If I feel like I could have her heart any time any place, sometimes I'll let her go. This almost always ends up coming back to haunt me later, though. I never learn.
She Was Too Negative: All too often, I end up with the brooding, depressed, uptight type who is constantly complaining. I don't expect someone to be happy all the time, but if she makes me unhappy every time I see her, why stay with her?
What reasons have guys used to break up with you, and which make you most angry? What reasons have caused you to break up with guys? Which reasons do you think are the most common cause of breakups- do they differ for guys and women? TAKE HEED 1NE!!!!
* He changed
* We weren't compatible
* He cheated on me
When I was little, it drove me crazy when my parents supported "no" with "because I said so." I always wanted a reason. I'm not sure if knowing why always helps, but perhaps if you know common reasons guys break up with girls, you'll at least be able to see it coming. So, here are mine:
I Got Bored: I've read many different hypotheses on attention span, but my favorite is (Wikipedia):
"Continuous attention span, or the amount of time a human can focus on an object without any lapse at all, is very brief and may be as short as 8 seconds. After this amount of time, it is likely that an individual's eyes will shift focus, or that a stray thought will briefly enter consciousness."
My attention span (unless it's a football game or a song) may be worse. I know a relationship is not supposed to be exciting all the time, so getting through those flatline moments between the sparks is critical. If I start having more fun with other activities, the relationship is doomed.
One of Us Was Too Serious: This could be as simple as she wanted to see me three times a week, and I only wanted to see her once a week. If she's flirting with other guys, flighty, or not as into it as I am, then I'm too serious for her.
Burnout: I'm a big believer in pacing and rhythm in dating. A relationship can suffer burnout if certain milestones occur too fast: Being exclusive, sex, meeting parents. When that happens, I get that feeling the colonists must have gotten after they won the Revolutionary War: "Ok, we did it...so now what?"
I Was Tempted To Cheat: I do my best not to cheat, so when I have recurring urges to cheat on my girlfriend, I figure it's time to break up with her. I don't need to go through with cheating; the constant urge is enough for me to end things.
All My Friends Broke Up With Their Girlfriends: This is by far the most immature reason on this list. While my girlfriend and I are curled up on the couch watching "The Devil Wears Prada," my newly single guy friends are out shredding the karaoke waves with Journey's "Don't Stop Believin" and tearing up the town. That conflict gives me wanderlust. It's much easier when we are all in for a quiet Saturday night with the significant others.
Divergent Lives: If someone moves to another town, or work is taking over, or other life changes are driving you apart, sometimes it's best to end it.
Feeling Selfish: Dating is selfless because you're giving your time and yourself up to a relationship. "Me time" is necessary at some point to work on career/living situation, travel, or whatever. When I'm in a "selfish period," it's tough to participate in a relationship.
I "Misread" My Feelings: This is the most unfair of all the reasons. Both genders make this mistake—you get into a relationship and everything seems so great. Then, a few weeks later, you realize you got wrapped up in something for the wrong reason, dated for the sake of dating, or whatever, and you need to get out.
My Friends Or Family Didn't Like Her: I pay close attention to friend/family opinions because they know me best, and they've earned the right to have their say. Also, friends and family may be able to see things inside the relationship that I'm too blinded to see.
I Took Her For Granted: Great relationships should be easy, but there has to be some tension too—especially in the beginning. If it's too easy, there's a lack of challenge. If I feel like I could have her heart any time any place, sometimes I'll let her go. This almost always ends up coming back to haunt me later, though. I never learn.
She Was Too Negative: All too often, I end up with the brooding, depressed, uptight type who is constantly complaining. I don't expect someone to be happy all the time, but if she makes me unhappy every time I see her, why stay with her?
What reasons have guys used to break up with you, and which make you most angry? What reasons have caused you to break up with guys? Which reasons do you think are the most common cause of breakups- do they differ for guys and women? TAKE HEED 1NE!!!!
SIGN OF THE TIMES????-Ebony: Up for Sale?
The advertising slump hammers the nation's oldest magazine devoted to African-American life.
For 50 years, the Ebony Fashion Fair has been a glamorous social event in dozens of U.S. communities. The traveling fashion show has raised $55 million in college scholarships for African-American students. But this year the company behind the show, Johnson Publishing which publishes Ebony, pulled the plug on the event, citing lack of corporate sponsorship due to the recession. "This is devastating to us," Ann Lee, publicity chairwoman for the Charmettes, a civic group that staged the event in Broward County, Fla., told The Miami Herald.
It's been a year of excruciating decisions for publishing companies—layoffs, pullbacks, closures. Now it appears Johnson Publishing’s chairman and CEO, Linda Johnson Rice, has reached what must have been an agonizing decision: Johnson Publishing is seeking a buyer or investor for its flagship publication, Ebony, in an effort aimed at securing the survival of the nation's oldest magazine devoted to African-American life. It's unclear whether the company's other properties, including Jet, would be part of a possible sale.
According to media and investment executives familiar with the developments, Chicago-based Rice, the daughter of Ebony's legendary founder, the late John H. Johnson, has approached, among others, Time Inc., Viacom, and private investors that include buyout firms. Time Inc., the world's largest periodical publisher, already owns Essence, a monthly lifestyle, beauty, and fashion magazine for African-American women. Viacom, meanwhile, owns BET (Black Entertainment Television).
Nothing has yet resulted from any of Johnson Publishing's overtures, however. And it's unclear whether negotiations are underway between the publishing company and any of the identified parties or other potential rescuers.
Time Inc. declined to comment, as did Viacom. "Your facts are incorrect with respect to Time Inc. and Viacom," a spokeswoman for Johnson Publishing said. Johnson Publishing likely made its overtures through the media giants' properties, NEWSWEEK's sources indicate. They also declined to elaborate much beyond acknowledging, on condition of not being named, that they were aware of Johnson's efforts. According to one top magazine executive, Johnson Publishing is requiring potential bidders to sign a confidentiality agreement to access the company's financial information, a standard practice in the dealmaking world.
One publishing executive familiar with the situation said that Rice, given the magazine's historical significance and its deep roots in her family, hopes to remain an integral part of it. This suggests she prefers to woo a partner rather than sell the magazine outright. In any case, a purchase by a mainstream media company or publisher—a move that would end African-American control—might cause a stir in some quarters of the African-American community, as was the case with Viacom's acquisition of BET. And Ebony's woes would appear to dash hopes that African-American-owned or -oriented media would see a big lift in the marketplace with the election of Barack Obama, the nation's first African-American president. Ebony landed the first post-election print interview with the president-elect and his wife. Rice is a close member of the Obamas' Chicago social circle.
The economic downturn has killed off scores of magazines, including such prominent titles as Condé Nast Portfolio and Domino, while forcing others onto the auction block, including BusinessWeek. But the historic Ebony has fared worse than average amid the industry's woes. In fact, Ebony's advertising pages and ad revenues have declined in each of the last three years, even during periods when the industry was flat to positive. Among the 243 magazines tracked by the Publishers Information Bureau, ad pages plunged an average of 28 percent, with revenues falling by 21 percent, in the first half of 2009 compared with the same period a year earlier. But Ebony's decline was sharper, as advertising dived almost 35 percent, dragging revenues down almost 32 percent, to $18.8 million from 2008's $27.7 million. And the deterioration of Jet magazine, Ebony's sister publication, was even more severe—about 40 percent in ad pages and revenues.
And according to industry tracker Media Industry Newsletter, things have only turned grimmer for Ebony since the first half. Total ad pages sank by 40 percent this year through the October issue, now on newsstands and featuring Whitney Houston on the cover, compared with 2008's January–October editions. The company is "in big, big trouble," a publishing executive close to the developments told NEWSWEEK. "It's a sad thing, because they are so important to [African-American] communities."
In 1942, with a $500 loan collateralized with his mother's furniture, John Johnson launched what would become the world's largest African-American-owned publishing company. Three years later he began publishing Ebony, which changed the face of publishing and media merely by its existence and mission. "Ebony," Johnson once said, "was founded to project a dimension of the black personality in a world saturated with stereotypes. We wanted to give blacks a new sense of somebodiness, a new sense of self-respect." Covers graced with positive images of African-American celebrities and politicians are a staple of the magazine, as are articles extolling African-American achievement. Johnson, who died in 2005, was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1996.
For 50 years, the Ebony Fashion Fair has been a glamorous social event in dozens of U.S. communities. The traveling fashion show has raised $55 million in college scholarships for African-American students. But this year the company behind the show, Johnson Publishing which publishes Ebony, pulled the plug on the event, citing lack of corporate sponsorship due to the recession. "This is devastating to us," Ann Lee, publicity chairwoman for the Charmettes, a civic group that staged the event in Broward County, Fla., told The Miami Herald.
It's been a year of excruciating decisions for publishing companies—layoffs, pullbacks, closures. Now it appears Johnson Publishing’s chairman and CEO, Linda Johnson Rice, has reached what must have been an agonizing decision: Johnson Publishing is seeking a buyer or investor for its flagship publication, Ebony, in an effort aimed at securing the survival of the nation's oldest magazine devoted to African-American life. It's unclear whether the company's other properties, including Jet, would be part of a possible sale.
According to media and investment executives familiar with the developments, Chicago-based Rice, the daughter of Ebony's legendary founder, the late John H. Johnson, has approached, among others, Time Inc., Viacom, and private investors that include buyout firms. Time Inc., the world's largest periodical publisher, already owns Essence, a monthly lifestyle, beauty, and fashion magazine for African-American women. Viacom, meanwhile, owns BET (Black Entertainment Television).
Nothing has yet resulted from any of Johnson Publishing's overtures, however. And it's unclear whether negotiations are underway between the publishing company and any of the identified parties or other potential rescuers.
Time Inc. declined to comment, as did Viacom. "Your facts are incorrect with respect to Time Inc. and Viacom," a spokeswoman for Johnson Publishing said. Johnson Publishing likely made its overtures through the media giants' properties, NEWSWEEK's sources indicate. They also declined to elaborate much beyond acknowledging, on condition of not being named, that they were aware of Johnson's efforts. According to one top magazine executive, Johnson Publishing is requiring potential bidders to sign a confidentiality agreement to access the company's financial information, a standard practice in the dealmaking world.
One publishing executive familiar with the situation said that Rice, given the magazine's historical significance and its deep roots in her family, hopes to remain an integral part of it. This suggests she prefers to woo a partner rather than sell the magazine outright. In any case, a purchase by a mainstream media company or publisher—a move that would end African-American control—might cause a stir in some quarters of the African-American community, as was the case with Viacom's acquisition of BET. And Ebony's woes would appear to dash hopes that African-American-owned or -oriented media would see a big lift in the marketplace with the election of Barack Obama, the nation's first African-American president. Ebony landed the first post-election print interview with the president-elect and his wife. Rice is a close member of the Obamas' Chicago social circle.
The economic downturn has killed off scores of magazines, including such prominent titles as Condé Nast Portfolio and Domino, while forcing others onto the auction block, including BusinessWeek. But the historic Ebony has fared worse than average amid the industry's woes. In fact, Ebony's advertising pages and ad revenues have declined in each of the last three years, even during periods when the industry was flat to positive. Among the 243 magazines tracked by the Publishers Information Bureau, ad pages plunged an average of 28 percent, with revenues falling by 21 percent, in the first half of 2009 compared with the same period a year earlier. But Ebony's decline was sharper, as advertising dived almost 35 percent, dragging revenues down almost 32 percent, to $18.8 million from 2008's $27.7 million. And the deterioration of Jet magazine, Ebony's sister publication, was even more severe—about 40 percent in ad pages and revenues.
And according to industry tracker Media Industry Newsletter, things have only turned grimmer for Ebony since the first half. Total ad pages sank by 40 percent this year through the October issue, now on newsstands and featuring Whitney Houston on the cover, compared with 2008's January–October editions. The company is "in big, big trouble," a publishing executive close to the developments told NEWSWEEK. "It's a sad thing, because they are so important to [African-American] communities."
In 1942, with a $500 loan collateralized with his mother's furniture, John Johnson launched what would become the world's largest African-American-owned publishing company. Three years later he began publishing Ebony, which changed the face of publishing and media merely by its existence and mission. "Ebony," Johnson once said, "was founded to project a dimension of the black personality in a world saturated with stereotypes. We wanted to give blacks a new sense of somebodiness, a new sense of self-respect." Covers graced with positive images of African-American celebrities and politicians are a staple of the magazine, as are articles extolling African-American achievement. Johnson, who died in 2005, was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1996.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)