Simple Questions for Senator Obama (UPDATE)
By Larry Johnson
Email: larry_johnson@earthlink.net
Site: http://NoQuarterUSA.net
About: Larry C. Johnson is a former analyst at the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, who moved subsequently in 1989 to the U.S. Department of State, where he served four years as the deputy director for transportation security, antiterrorism assistance training, and special operations in the State Department's Office of Counterterrorism. He left government service in October 1993 and set up a consulting business. He currently is the co-owner and CEO of BERG Associates, LLC (Business Exposure Reduction Group) and is an expert in the fields of terrorism, aviation security, and crisis and risk management, and money laundering investigations. Johnson is the founder and main author of No Quarter, a weblog that addresses issues of terrorism and intelligence and politics. NoQuarterUSA was nominated as Best Political Blog of 2008.[1] He has worked as a private consultant on issues of international terrorism and security for the U.S. Government and private companies. Johnson has appeared as a consultant and commentator in many major newspapers and news programs.[2]
Contents [hide]
1 Background
2 Views
2.1 1996
2.2 1998
2.3 1999
2.4 2000
2.5 2001
2.6 2003
2.6.1 Plame affair
2.7 2008
3 Notes
4 References
5 External links
[edit]Background
Larry Johnson moved to Washington, D.C. in 1979 to begin work on a Ph.D. at the American University. Although he completed successfully all coursework and comprehensive exams, he did not write a dissertation. In 1978 and in 1983-85 he worked in Latin America on community development projects as a community organizer. Returning to the United States in 1985 he joined the Central Intelligence Agency, thanks in part to a letter of recommendation from Republican Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) that helped to "open doors" for him at the Agency.[3] Johnson entered on duty at the CIA in September 1985 and was a classmate of Valerie Plame. Every member of that class was undercover. After a year in the Career Trainee program, which included a stint with the Afghan Task Force, Johnson was assigned as an analyst in the Middle America Caribbean Division in the Latin American Affairs Office of the Directorate of Intelligence. He received two Exceptional Performance awards and was promoted ultimately to Senior Regional Analyst for Central America.
Johnson remained undercover in the CIA until October 1989, when he resigned from the CIA and started a new job in the Office of Counter Terrorism at the Department of State. Johnson played an instrumental role in launching the Terrorism Rewards program international advertising campaign (working with Diplomatic Security officers Brad Smith and Michael Parks). [4] Johnson also was involved in a variety of crisis management response operations, including the release of hostages from Lebanon and liaison with the Pan Am 103 families. He left government service in October 1993 and started his own business as a consultant.
After leaving government service, Johnson became a frequent guest on many major television news shows when a question of terrorism came up. He was first interviewed by CNN following the capture of Carlos the Jackal. Johnson subsequently appeared on CNN, ABC's Nightline, CBS, the BBC, MSNBC, the Jim Lehrer News Hour, NBC, and NPR. In December of 1999, for example, Johnson was hired by NBC to serve as its terrorist expert for the Y2000 and was in Time Square with Tom Brokaw and Katie Couric ("a lot of fun and the best way to see in the New Year"). Johnson also was hired in January 2002 as a Fox News Analyst and remained under contract until February 2003.
Since 1994 a significant focus of Johnson's consulting work has been with the U.S. military special operations forces in scripting and conducting military counter terrorism exercises. He traveled under orders from the U.S. military to Iraq in May 2006 to work on a short term project.
A registered Republican who supported President Bush in 2000, Johnson became a strong critic of the Bush administration in May 2003 for its conduct of the war in Iraq and, a few months later, for its role in the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame.[5] He was also featured in the 2004 political documentary Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism. Since Robert Novak's controversial disclosure of Valerie Plame as a CIA operative in July 2003, Johnson has contributed to public discourse on intelligence matters, often sparking further controversy. He has been interviewed by both the mass media and the alternative media and published commentaries on a variety of issues, including the Plame affair, the controversy concerning Mary McCarthy, and the resignation of Porter Goss as Director of Central Intelligence.
[edit]Views
This article or section may contain an inappropriate mixture of prose and timeline.
Please help convert this timeline into prose or, if necessary, a list.
[edit]1996
In 1996, Johnson noted that terrorism worldwide was on the decline. "Terrorist incidents [both internationally and in the US] have fallen to levels not seen since the 1970s. Whether measured by the number of incidents, the number of fatalities, or the number of groups, raw statistics demonstrate that the level of terrorist violence has declined since the mid-1980s. In fact, the evidence suggests terrorism was more widespread and deadly 10 years ago."[6]
He also wrote an op-ed piece for the New York Times suggesting that the newer and more deadly terrorist threat to the U.S. was embodied by "networks of terrorists, mostly foreign, working within its borders." Exemplifying this threat was Ramzi Yousef, one of the masterminds behind the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center. In the article, Johnson suggests that enhanced cooperation between intelligence agencies, particularly the FBI and CIA, is mandatory to meet the growing threat of terror networks.[7]
[edit]1998
In 1998, Johnson argued that while overall terrorism was declining, the threat from bin Laden and al-Qaeda should be the focus of American counterterrorism policy:
The nature of the threat posed by Bin Ladin is highlighted by my final chart, number 7. Osama Bin Ladin and individuals associated with him have killed and wounded more Americans than any other group. This chart also illustrates that groups such as Hamas and the Tamil Tigers (LTTE) prior to 1998 have killed more foreigners in the anti-US terrorist attacks. If we take into account the bombings of the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, Osama's status as the most lethal terrorist is certain.[8]
In addition, he told USA Today that bin Laden had participated in "virtually every major attack of terrorism against the United States" in the 1990s. Johnson underlined the threat posed by bin Laden, saying that he was possessed by "hatred and craziness." If left unanswered, "he would continue to terrorize Americans around the world. He has no compunction about killing women and children. He's a complete egalitarian in his murderous attitude."[9]
[edit]1999
In an interview with PBS's Frontline for its 1999 program, Hunting bin Laden, Johnson discussed Osama bin Laden.[10] According to Johnson, Americans had "tended to make Osama bin Laden sort of a superman in Muslim garb." "Actually," he continues, "Osama bin Laden, in my view, represents more of a symptom of a problem, and the problem is this: the Saudi Arabian government, not just Osama bin Laden but many people in Saudi Arabia, have been sending money to radical Islamic groups for years." Johnson continued:
When you look at who's killed Americans in the last 10 years, the individuals he's supported and backed--I'm basing that upon the initial information that's been released in the indictments and conversations with others in the intelligence communities--Osama bin Laden has been the one killing Americans. No other terrorist group in the world has been out killing Americans except for Osama bin Laden.... Osama bin Laden remains out there as the one really targeting us. So, we recognize that he's the threat. He's serious about wanting to kill Americans, but as long as he's in Afghanistan, as long as he doesn't have access to a cell phone, as long as he can't just hop on a plane and travel wherever he wants without fear of being arrested, his ability to plan and conduct terrorist operations is extremely limited. We have to recognize [that] he would like to do a lot of damage. He would like to kill Americans, but wanting to is different from being able to, having the full capabilities in place.[11]
In the interview, Johnson doubted the ability of members of bin Laden's organization to plan and put their lives on the line:
There's not another Ali or Mustafa out there at this point and Osama bin Laden in my view has not been a very effective organizer or leader. He talks a great game and puts out terrific threats as far as stirring the passions in the United States and maybe firing up the imaginations of some young Muslims throughout the world. But when push comes to shove, can he get a group of people who are together who will say: we are going to plan an operation, we're going to put our lives on the line, we're going to go out and try and kill people and we don't care what the consequence is? It hasn't happened.[12]
Frontline asked:
[Is it] ... fair to say what you're saying is that the president of the United States, his national security advisor, his deputy national security advisor for counter-terrorism, are basically blowing smoke [about the danger posed by bin Laden] and his followers]?
Johnson responded:
They're grossly exaggerating the problem. They are hyping it. They shouldn't be talking about rising terrorism. Instead of saying "terrorism's rising," it's not. "Terrorism is spreading," it's not. "More people are dying from terrorism," not the case. But what they should be saying is, "There's one individual out there that really doesn't like us, and he's made it his mission in life to kill Americans, and we've gotta deal with him." But we need to have a voice of reason in that process instead of putting ourselves out crying wolf, because this is essentially what's taking place right now. They call it the administration that cries wolf.[12]
[edit]2000
Johnson co-authored an article in 2000 with Milt Bearden which focused on the threat posed by al-Qaeda specifically, rather than terrorism trends in general. Beardon and Johnson note that new information emerging about the bombings at Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 points to the threat posed by Imad Mugniyah and Osama Bin Laden will require "a coordinated policy that will employ a full range of covert, clandestine, diplomatic, and military operations," concluding:
The Clinton Administration has shot its bolt on the terrorist problem with small effect, and no last minute show of force will change the record. A new administration can start afresh with a more sharply defined set of terrorism goals – Mughniyeh and bin Laden and their protectors for starters – and bring the full, coordinated force of American diplomatic, military, and intelligence capabilities to bear on the problem.[13]
[edit]2001
After Johnson's testimony to the special forum at the U.S. Senate, Gary J. Schmitt, executive director and CEO of the Project for the New American Century, refers in the Daily Standard (blog) to an op-ed piece Johnson wrote two months prior to the 9/11 attacks, claiming that Johnson argued that the US had little to fear from terrorism.[14]
In an editorial entitled "The Declining Terrorist Threat," published in the New York Times on 10 July 2001, Johnson says:
Judging from news reports and the portrayal of villains in our popular entertainment, Americans are bedeviled by fantasies about terrorism. They seem to believe that terrorism is the greatest threat to the United States and that it is becoming more widespread and lethal. They are likely to think that the United States is the most popular target of terrorists. And they almost certainly have the impression that extremist Islamic groups cause most terrorism.... None of these beliefs are based in fact.... While terrorism is not vanquished, in a world where thousands of nuclear warheads are still aimed across the continents, terrorism is not the biggest security challenge confronting the United States, and it should not be portrayed that way.[15]
Ten days after the 9/11 attacks, after quoting the above passage, Timothy Noah concludes a post in his "Chatterbox" feature at Slate: "Johnson's analysis, we now see, was bold, persuasive, and 100 percent wrong."[16] Johnson defended himself against such attacks:
The rightwing is resurrecting an op-ed I wrote in July 2001. I stand by the full article. It is still relevant today. I am accused, incorrectly, of ignoring the threat of terrorism. In fact, I correctly noted that the real threat emanated from Bin Laden and Islamic extremism. President Bush, for his part, ignored the CIA warning in August 2001 that Al Qaeda was posed to strike inside the United States.[17]
After September 11, Johnson appeared several times on FOX News to address the question of military action against terrorism. On 14 November, he defended the FBI's proposal to interview 5,000 students in the U.S. suspected of having information relevant to the September 11 investigations:
I think they should talk to everyone that they feel they have a need to talk to. I mean, look, this is war. This is not a legal proceeding. This isn't the O.J. Simpson trial. The folks that attacked us -- they murdered Americans. And we've got to recognize that in wartime, we should do things differently.[18]
[edit]2003
In January 2003, Johnson wrote an analysis of the relationship between the upcoming U.S. invasion of Iraq and the threat of transnational terrorism. According to Johnson, Bremer's response was to tell him that "it didn't matter what Saddam did or didn't do, we were going to war."[19] The paper warned that an invasion would "do little to destroy the infrastructure of radical Islamic terrorism responsible for the 9-11 attacks." Noting that Saddam Hussein's regime has been a longtime supporter of regional terrorist organizations such as the PLO, Johnson examines contacts between Saddam Hussein and transnational terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda:
There is no doubt that Iraq is a state sponsor of terrorism—i.e., a country that provides financial support, safe haven, training, or weapons and explosives to groups or individuals that carry out terrorist attacks. . . . According to Central Intelligence Agency data, there is no credible evidence implicating Iraq in any mass casualty terrorist attacks since 1991. . . .
Johnson notes that the period immediately leading up to 2003 saw a rise of activity surrounding terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, suggesting that "Iraq is willing to help a movement that it would otherwise oppose on ideological grounds. Nonetheless," Johnson concludes, "it is important to understand that Iraqi entreaties to Al Qaeda, are most likely intended as a tactic to bolster Iraq’s ability to fight off a U.S. invasion rather than a deep-seated theological and ideological commitment to the terrorist agenda of Bin Laden.[20]
In that analysis Johnson also warns that the U.S.-led invasion was likely to backfire:
In fact there is a serious risk that a U.S. led war against Iraq may crystallize the diffused anger in the Arab and Muslim world — a heretofore unattained goal of bin Laden and his followers — and persuade more Muslim youths to take up the terrorist banner against America and her citizens.... If we decide to invade Iraq we must be prepared for the contingency that our attack will inspire young Muslims to pursue jihad against the West in general and the United States in particular. Just as the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan rallied many Muslims, especially young adults to the cause of jihad, a U.S. attack may enable Islamic extremists to attract new followers.[20]
Johnson also gave interviews on the topic of what to do with captured al-Qaeda leaders; while he did not condone torture, he suggested that a "sleep deprivation and reward system" might be useful for getting information from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed:
I don't see a constitutional right to have eight hours of sleep. You shouldn't subject someone to freezing but they don't get to wear mink coats, either.[21]
In May 2003, Johnson joined members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) in condemning the manipulation of intelligence for political purposes:
It is a misuse and abuse of intelligence. The president was being misled. He was ill served by the folks who are supposed to protect him on this. Whether this was witting or unwitting, I don't know, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.[22]
[edit]Plame affair
After Robert Novak wrote a column identifying the wife of former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson as a CIA officer, the media invited Johnson to comment on the ensuing scandal because he had been a member of the same Career Trainee class with Valerie Plame Wilson. For example, in October 2003, he appeared on Democracy Now to discuss the Plame affair. He told interviewer Amy Goodman that Valerie Wilson's cover should have been respected whether she was an "analyst" or a "cleaning lady": "if she's undercover she's undercover, period. If the media allows themselves to get distracted with those kinds of curve balls, they ignore the issue."[23]
He told a Senate Democratic Policy Committee in October 2003, "My classmates and I have been betrayed. Together, we have kept the secrets of each other's identities a secret for 18 years. Each and every one of us have kept that secret, whether we were in the CIA, in other government service or in the private sector. But this issue is not just about a blown cover. It is about the destruction of the very essence, the core of human intelligence collection activities: plausible deniability, apparently, for partisan domestic political reasons."[24]
Johnson testified at a special joint hearing of Congressional and Senate Democrats on 22 July 2005 about the consequences arising from the Plame affair.[25]
[edit]2008
In 2008, Johnson emerged as a staunch supporter of Hillary Clinton and a strong critic of Barack Obama. Larry Johnson's blog, NoQuarterUSA, became a rally point for Clinton supporters wary of Barack Obama's qualifications to be president. Supporters of Barack Obama insist that a story that first appeared on Johnson's blog--a report that Republican operatives have a tape of Michelle Obama making racially insenstive comments about caucasians--has been "refuted" Barack Obama's Fight the Smears website.[26]. However, Johnson never claimed to have the tape and reported that the Republican operatives controlling it intended to release the tape sometime after the Democratic Convention in August 2008. On October 21, however, he asserted that the operative in possession of the tape had been instructed by the McCain campaign not to release it.[27]
[edit]Notes
^ http://2008.weblogawards.org/polls/best-political-coverage/
^ Larry C. Johnson, "About Me," No Quarter (personal blog).
^ "Former CIA Official Larry Johnson Delivers Democratic Radio Address," transcript posted on official Democratic National Committee's website for The Democratic Party, July 23, 2005], accessed November 21, 2006.
^ Interview with Larry Johnson, confirmed by his supervisor
^ "Ex-CIA official Blasts Bush on Leak of Operative's Name: Democrats' Radio Address Focuses on White House Aides' Role," CNN July 23, 2005, accessed November 21, 2006.
^ Gail Russell Chaddock, "Why Terrorists Pick On the French," Christian Science Monitor (5 December 1996) p. 1.
^ Larry Johnson, "Terrorists Among Us," New York Times (20 August 1996) p. A19.
^ Terrorism Today
^ Lee Michael Katz, "The Hunt for Bin Laden," USA Today (21 August 1998) p. 1A.
^ See Transcript of original interview with Larry C. Johnson, as broadcast on Frontline in 1999. Cf. "Interview: Larry C. Johnson," for Hunting bin Laden, transcript of interview broadcast on Frontline subsequently on 13 April 2001. See also dedicated PBS webpages for media links: Iraq and the War on Terror, Frontline PBS, online featured programs, accessed 19 November 2006.
^ frontline: hunting bin laden: interviews: larry c. johnson | PBS
^ a b [1].
^ As posted in [2].
^ Gary Schmitt, [ 07/25/2005 "Meet Larry Johnson: The CIA official Turned Democratic Spokesman Has a Pre-9/11 Mindset," Daily Standard (blog), July 25, 2005, accessed November 20, 2006.
^ *Larry C. Johnson, "The Declining Terrorist Threat," The New York Times 10 July 2001: A19.
^ Timothy Noah, "(Not Exactly a) Whopper of the Week: Larry C. Johnson," Chatterbox: Gossip, speculation, and scuttlebutt about politics (blog), hosted by Slate September 21, 2001, accessed November 20, 2006. Note the full context of this quotation:
It is, to be sure, a little bit cheap (and slightly at odds with the usual parameters of this feature) to criticize someone for making an erroneous prediction, particularly after a tragedy. Chatterbox is especially reluctant to tag Johnson because Johnson's op-ed was argued forcefully, backed up meticulously with factual data, and bravely at odds with conventional wisdom at the time of its publication. Add in that Johnson now makes his living as a consultant to corporations about terrorism, and therefore had everything to gain by exaggerating the dangers terrorism poses, and the guy practically looks like a hero. Chatterbox, who two decades ago was an editor for the New York Times op-ed page, would have published Johnson's piece had he still been an editor there this past July. In his capacity at Slate, Chatterbox might well have written up Johnson's prediction, and perhaps even endorsed it.
But boy, is he glad he didn't! Johnson's analysis, we now see, was bold, persuasive, and 100 percent wrong. Sadly, a mistake this embarrassing cannot be ignored. As a fellow skeptic, Chatterbox in all sincerity wishes Johnson better luck next time.
^ Larry C. Johnson, "Johnson vs. President Bush," re-posted and updated by SusanHu at DailyKos (blog) July 25, 2005.
^ FOX News Interview with John Garrett (14 November 2001) Transcript #111405cb.260.
^ [3].
^ a b Larry C. Johnson, "Setting the Record Straight on Iraqi Terrorism," posted in Booman Tribune: A Progressive Community (personal blog) 27 January 2003. accessed 19 November 2006.
^ Qtd. in Toby Harnden, "CIA 'pressure' on al-Qa'eda chief," The London Telegraph 5 March 2003: 16.
^ Qtd. in Nicolas D. Kristof, "Save Our Spooks," The New York Times 30 May 2003:A6.
^ Democracy Now (3 October 2003)[4]
^ U.S. Senate, Democratic Policy Committee Meeting on the CIA Operative Leak, (24 October 2003).
^ Letter to the Senate.[Needs full source citation; see "References" section.]
^ Tumulty, Karen (2008-06-12). "Will Obama's Anti-Rumor Plan Work?", Time Magazine. Retrieved on 20 June 2008.:"a story that apparently first made a big splash on the Internet in late May in a post by pro-Hillary Clinton blogger Larry Johnson"
^ Whitey Tape, API, Phil Berg, and Andy MartinSee Authors Posts (1090) on February 27, 2008 at 9:28 PM in Current Affairs
Not complicated. No nuance. Very straightforward. Is there any member of your staff–presidential campaign or senatorial office (including district staff)–who is a member of the Nation of Islam? If no, then never mind. We will condemn Debbie Schlussel for spreading a vicious unfounded rumor. But if the answer is yes, then you have a problem.
There are certain groups and individuals that should not be allowed anywhere near an office of public trust like the Presidency. Nazis, KKK, David Duke, and the Nation of Islam. This is not about being anti-black. If the individuals in question were members of CORE or the NAACP no problem. Those groups push for equality. They don’t preach a form of racism and hate. It is up to Senator Obama to be very clear and precise–no member of his staff will belong to or associate with any organization that preaches hatred and racial division.
UPDATE: Here’s a challenge. Please call the Obama campaign and see if they will deny this. For folks like Cee this should be a no brainer. Here’s your chance to defend the honor of your guy. But what happens when they refuse to comment?
[p.s., Special thanks to Susan for shouldering the burden of the blog these past few days. I was incommunicado in the wilds of Yellowstone National Park. I'll report on that later. But meanwhile, thanks Susan!]
(small, medium and large sizes; for both dogs and cats)
+ 
Larry,
Obama was clear.
I don’t agree with you that people should be denied WORK based on their personal beliefs.
The ACLU is on my side on this.
Here is an example of Hillary being a hypocrite.
From New York Daily News reporter Michael McAuliffe’s pool report. He was with Sen. Clinton today for a round of satellite interviews.
She was asked by KTVT in Dallas about a Latina backer who said that black politicians never do anything for Hispanics. Her name is Adelfa Callejo. Apparently she’s 84.
[The question: "She recently told us that African-Americans never help Hispanics when they gain power and influence and that she would never vote for Sen. Obama, and now quoting here she said 'Obama’s problem is that he happens to be black.' How do you react to those comments?"]
The newscaster quoted her saying “Obama’s problem is that he happens to be black.”
Clinton: “Well obviously I want us judged on our merits. I believe strongly that the fact that we have an Aftrican Ameircan and a woman running for the Democratic nomination is historical and I’m very very proud of that . I want people thought to look beyond, look beyond race and gender, look at our records, look what we stand for, look what we’ve done and I think that;s what most voters are looking for.”
Q (paraphrase) Is this something you reject and denounce?
“People have every reason to express their opinions. I just don’t agree with that. I think that we should be looking at the individuals who are running.”
Q - Do you still want her support, though?
Clinton laughed and said, “You know This is a free country. People…
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/
“I don’t agree with you that people should be denied WORK based on their personal beliefs.”
Really. Does that apply to Al Qaeda terrorists? I wouldn’t ask but he seems to like that scumbag Ayers.
Ralph,
Ask people in the intelligence agencies who have used them before.
I watch for an answer too.
I’ve observed your bias for many weeks, and it amazes me how you overlook obvious problems with Obama that you cannot see, hear, or think.
It appears pointless to try, but I am sure you will have an excuse for Obama’s reprehensible acceptance of Farrakhan’s endorsement and the hundreds of thousands of votes it gives Obama. That Farrakhan is a Black Fascist and enemy of this country doesn’t seem to concern you. Nor his blatant anti semitism for which he is famous. And the hate that he spreads without restraint.
Have you ever asked yourself why would Obama stay in a Church and remain friends with its pastor, Rev Jeremiah Wright, a follower and devotee of Louis Farrrakhan, if he himself were not beholden to this son of Islam, Farrakhan Black Fascist with a home grown army and billions raked in by his white hating, jew hating followers. Yes, they will be giving their votes to Obama.
When I find myself in a church whose pastor does not represent my ethics or worldwiew, I remove myself and become part of another church that is close to my beliefs not just of God, but of social justice and conscience.
NorrisMorris: Last paragraph,Same thought for me on drive home.
And sexism. Rampant in that group.
Yes, sexism. The defining schism of this elective process. It seems ok for Blacks to almost entirely endorse Obama. Men or Women blacks.
But…it’s not ok for women to endorse a woman because “I won’t vote for anyone just because she’s a woman, blah. We mean white or some latina women, because black women have gone “Obama”.
But I have never seen the degree of invective,smut,foul language, and sexist attacks on women so out there. On a Google blog, a black man’s face on a yellow TShirt printed in black says, “A Ho’ for O”. The “C” word with unprintable language about Hillary’s body parts are discussed in language and intent demeaning of all women.The blogs are obsessed with sexist hatred, slurs,sexual innuendo.
The sexism is exposed and it is a sickness that will derange our society. Obama’s promises cannot even touch the degree of contempt for women I see in print, on TV, and on the net.
And ugly though it may be, woman actually are not voting in their interest. But blacks are. Latinos are.
Women have actually preferred to be ruled by men in a society that encourages “getting the man”, and empahasizes vulgarity and exaggerated sexually driven debasing behavior in our sitcoms,videos,and the woman is still….the bait. Dressing and behaving like sluts is highly regarded in our media.
Women are still afraid to be strong and ambitious if it alienates their perceived ability to atttract a man in our society’s definitions of availability. “Getting” a man is still more important to women than acting in their self interest.
Other minorities like the blacks and latinos, never give it a second thought. Both men and women support their interests almost all the time.
The sexism is exposed and it is a sickness that will derange our society. Obama’s promises cannot even touch the degree of contempt for women I see in print, on TV, and on the net.
World wide and as long as the history of humandkind.
Though I am not sure by your post if you mean to say the subjugation of women in our society is perpetuated by women or men.
ala cultural conditioning.
Yes. Absolutely correct.
If Clinton were to get the nomination, I would expect blacks to riot. How I wish I could say the same about women if Obama is nominated.
Watching women like Dowd and the women they allow on MSM humiliate themselves by trashing Hillary is extremely painful.
Part of the problem is that women do not have neighborhoods, it is harder for us to develop a sex solidarity. We are raised from minute one in intimate contact with males and the patriarchal family. Rarely is there anyone to encourage our pride or resistance. We spend years, decades, struggling to find each other.
The main problem, along with why the ERA doesn’t become an amendment, is women want it both ways. They want to be pampered by their boyfriends, but want all the perks of being equals.
When I was in school working in restuarants, the guys resented doing all the heavy work (lifting especially), as they felt it unfair. So I started carrying the heavy boxes myself, and they saw that I did the same, and never griped to me about it again.
If women want to be equals, they HAVE to actually do equal work. Not want to be both special and equal.
Being equal doesn’t equate to lifting heavy boxes. Sheesh, I have had to lift heavy boxes for men for years. I don’t think of them as “less equal” because I happen to be strong in body. But a weaker man, in body, shouldn’t lose his place in line for promotion because I have a strong back and legs. That isn’t what it means to be treated equally under the law.
Yes, equal work in some measurement, but if you make it about “lifting especially”, then we’d have really redraw the map of equality among men too.
ChrisXp, I agree that some women want both ways, but only because, in my opinion and experience talking to very self aware women, they live in a world that hasn’t made the paradigm shift about gender roles and liberation.
My wife always says of the women in the world who want the ‘traditonal role’…”well that is their right too, but don’t dare impose it on me, or I’ll whip your ass.”
And she can….
I never have to think about protecting her. I usually have to ask her to Not whip someone’s ass. When we ever run into trouble, i’m not the worst case scenario, if you get my drift. She’ll tear your head off before I finish debating you.
I don’t give her the options, I accept her options and suggestion options.
I don’t give her room to be herself. She is herself and I have to learn to back the fuck off once in a while, to check myself.
Most men and boys were raised to dominate or accept dominance as a paradigm. Women have also been raised to accept that same role of the dominance game. In both categories, men and women can overcome those Gender Roles.
Now, superman, go lift some boxes. I’ve got to mow the lawn. (grunt)
Chris XP:
Okay let’s get back to the basics regarding Biology vs. Destiny. If you want men and women to do equal work, let men birth their own children. Let them give birth to the children of men through their anal vaginas. Let them go through days of labor and then succumb to unnecessary C-Sections. I say let them suckle their young via their underdeveloped mammary glands.
Go and birth a few children, the people of this planet, then go thank a mother not a motherfucker.
Your concern is noted, and appreciated, if questionably reasoned.
Do you really believe what you write?
Sounds like you do, and it’s dangerous.
For you.
I heard on the news today Connie is heading to the mid east next week, again to address the usual issues.
In researching the Bamsters ties to the Arabs, through Rezko, I of course came upon Bush and Cheney’s financial ties, too, Bush and Cheney connected to the same Sultans of Swing, and Petroleum, the Arab oil men who OWN American politicians, OWN them, in the Arab way, that whole BCCI, Suisse Bank crowd, same as the Bamalama, now the Bamalama of swing, as he too, is just another political whore, an oil bitch, bought and paid for….
Bush never stood a chance if asserting ANY control, implementing ANY American foreign policy, ANYWHERE, starting from the moment he stole the Presidency, accepting huge Arab oil man subsidies, same with Cheney, and the Bamalamadingdong. Bush goes to the Saudis, the Saudis don’t go to the American President.
Tsk tsk, your plans were DOA, Mr President.
Arab oil men tell Bush/Cheney what to do, Arab oil men OWN the Presidency, at least they think they do. They certainly own Bush.
And that should explain everything, the UTTER FAILURE of every Bush policy in the middle east, from the war, to oil prices, to Russian/Iranian hegemony, COMPLETE impotency, Bush and Cheney, the total limpness of American foreign policy, under the republicans.
And there will be more of the same with the Bamster, were he to be elected.
And Israel is screwed, it’s over.
And Connie?
Send a letter, don’t bother, they wrote off Cheney and Bush a long time ago, Bush never had a chance, WHORING himself, and the VP, for Arab oil money.
Same with the Bamalama.
You guys were DOA, and you still don’t know.
Moron foo!
If you step outside of American egocentricity, and look upon the Presidency as a extension of the main Arab OPEC oil cartel, everything falls into place, especially the disastrous Middle East policy decisions.
If Saudi Arabia ran America, what would happen?
Bush and Cheney, would, as well as Obama.
That’s what happens when you take billions of dollars from oil cartels.
And little Bush, and Cheney, aren’t Baker.
And little Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld don’t like being owned, do they, this not being what they had planned, complete and total policy failure, total capitulation.
Ah, but, you know business.
And notice that every question about Obama is answered with but, but, Clinton. I seem to remember a short time ago when the Wingnuts used the same ploy every time anyone had the audacity to question GWB.
Typical.
This is a very clear article with specific questions for Mr Obama. Yet, as usual, an Obama supporter can not talk specifics about Obama….just a comment about … “He was clear”…..ummm….Obama has never answered these questions.
So you give us a one liner…Obama was clear…and then a documentary on Hillary. If it wasn’t for Hillary Obama people would have nothing to talk about!
Obama’s associations should be a concern from every single American! AND ….. Obama SHOULD EXPECT direct questions and scrutiny…and he SHOULD give us open exact answers!!!!!
AND…what in the world are you worried about? IF Mr Obama is a fresh new smelling rose like we are bing led to believe…..then what is the problem!
You should WELCOME the questions… he should be delighted to provide the answers….then maybe we COULD ALL UNITE behind him enthusiastically as our President!
OR are you afraid of the truth?
Obama himself in 2004… stated he does not have the experience to be running for President in 2008. So why now? What is the rush to the White House about? Bush rushed us to war….and people are trying to rush OBama to the White House.
IF he is as great as people say…just think how superior he would be in 2012 or 2016!!!!!
What is the rush?
What is the fear of people asking appropriate questions of someone who is trying to be our President?
We leave here too!
Amazed.
Obama has hidden behind rhetoric and glibness.
He needs serious vetting, but Press is cowed with accusations of being racist, and obsessed with several other matters. Their usual opportunistic whorish enabling [a la Bush]is for access and TV shelf life. Without this there is no 24/7 news cycle. This is their ace card. Other issue is over riding sexism and the snide behavior of Chris Matthews, Russert, and the pack who really do not want ANY woman in power on this level.
At some point there may be an awakening as to who Obama has been bunking with. I know, and it ain’t good. But unless the press gives this legs, Obama’s back story remains a blur of largely fictional material.
I’m waiting for the real thing. The Jewish vote will be lost, I assure you if Farrakhan’s involvement with Obama in Chicago with the Black Muslim movement and the admiration of one of America’s main anti semites is revealed for what it is. Endorsement and votes. What will Obama owe this outlaw self professed Black Fascist?
We are on the brink of seeing the Son Of Islam and the company he keeps.
You are right. The truth will set us free.
Remember?
The video of this woman that Hillary won’t denounce
http://cbs11tv.com/video/?id=26467@ktvt.dayport.com
Cee,
Associations matter. Are you saying it is okay to have a neo-Nazi staffer in the White House? A skinhead?
Sorry, but I think it matters. Why do you excuse such behavior? I don’t deny folks the right to join the Nation of Islam. They enjoy that freedom in this country and should. But such people are not entitled to work for the President. They hold views that violate the very essence of our Constitution.
Larry,
They aren’t people I would vote for but if they aren’t criminals, we shouldn’t infringe upon on their rights to work or even run for office.
What views do NOI members have that violate the Constitution? I guess I need to get my copy to check.
David Duke ran. You see what happened.
I don’t excuse the behavior. I just love liberty.
of course they have a right to run for office. as you mention, david duke ran for office. but then…we oppose them for the most obvious reasons. David Duke is a racist. He didn’t get any votes outside his racist base, and he isn’t in office.
But that isn’t what LJ was saying. LJ was making a statement of his values. “nowhere near office” is his strong political view, and I agree with his overall sentiment.
There is no constitutional prohibition against being a racist, it is a collective disposition. if we were to consider, say…fred phelps, the racist homophobic hate monger, wouldn’t you say, “that man has no business being president.” that is a statement of your limits.
I agree with Larry’s overall view on this. I will respond directly to his comments below. But he isn’t saying a racist can’t have a job. He said they have no business in our government.
thats because Larry J values the integrity of our government.
when you overread his comments, you will argue more with your own interpretations than his words, a common honest mistake perhaps.
Anarchy cannot be one of the cornerstones of Obama’s pal’s beliefs. It runs counter to our constitution, our safety, our morality, and the conscience with which we function as moral decent human beings. He must disassociate himself from this group or any like it.
In spite of Obama’s rhetoric, he must sharply cut from this anarchistic group that undermines everything our democracy stands for. He cannot as President be associated with any part of any outlaw organization that operates on prejudice, hatred, and intimidation, and that preaches anarchy in any form.
The Nation of Islam cannot possibly be represented by an American President, or in fact by any of their affiliates.
It appears obvious that anyone would understand this, but Cee seems to think anything Obama wants is ok. Why? This is also political suicide.
what are you talking about “anarchy” for?
I am fundamentally an anarchist. Whats wrong with that? I don’t believe in illegitimate authority at all. I believe only in consensus.
But…because I don’t live, and we can’t acheive an anarchistic model, I will then work to at least check the authority that does exist.
Then again, I ain’t running for office, and wouldn’t.
Anarchist groups usually aren’t actually anarchist at all. They are usually using the word to draw reactionaries in, stimulate rebellion only. I don’t want simple rebellion. I want people to question authority, check if it is at all legitimate authority.
As with communism, the ideal state of equality cannot be reached because of greed, ignorance and corruption. So I’ll seek the closest to my model while lightly accepting that the masses have agreed to have an authoritative system.
I do not condone the mindless acts of violence that were committed by the Weather Underground, and the lack of any consideration to this day from William Ayers. It does not solve a damn thing, as it mimics what it hates.
Just a thought on Anarchy, not your criticism of some “anarchist” who really isn’t one anyway.
Crhis wrote:
———————————————————————————————-
I am fundamentally an anarchist.
———————————————————————————————-
Then you believe in destroying not only societies, but civilizations. For anarchy is what destroys them.
Anarchy is to civilizations, as poison is to life.
no, it isn’t.
that is what people may believe. anarchy simply means “without authority”. I do not believe in authority outside consensus. I accept authority exists. but you can have a civilization with consensus. societies can exist with consensus.
anarchy does not mean chaos.
Not what folks *may* believe, it IS the truth.
Without law and some semblence of order, hunter/gathers would’ve never settled down to create the complex societies that formed civilizations.
The cornerstone of all civilizations is a well formed and executed government
To destroy the cornerstone would mean we’ll return to be hunter/gathers, and shun humanity.
and another way to say is…thats what I’d like. thats what I wish we could have. But knowing human nature, I already accept it won’t happen. so, no I don’t believe in destruction of society or civilizations.
read the following definition:
a theory that regards the absence of all direct or coercive government as a political ideal and that proposes the cooperative and voluntary association of individuals and groups as the principal mode of organized society.
In other words return to be hunter/gatherers. Which means to be but beasts again. Which means the human in humanity will cease to exist.
Anarchy is pure Darwinism in principle.
no, not hunter gatherers.
did you ever read Thomas Payne’s common sense? he starts by clearly stating that Government is established because human beings have vices that muck up our ability to simply live and let live. He considered Government to be a ‘necessary evil’.
His position closely describes my ideal. I already know we cannot acheive this. But still because of my believes, I do not work to make More Government.
Consensus models only work in smaller groups, but there are many villages around the world where they aren’t hunter gatherers in the dark ages.
The people agree to their participation. They aren’t coerced into doing so. They vent disagreements with respect for the whole, and establish agreements to remedy issues.
People could still Serve the whole in positions of Public Servants, but they wouldn’t Lord over them.
And Anarchy, isn’t pure Darwinism. You’ll have to explain why you see it that way, I can’t guess your reasoning. It is participatory. It isn’t chaos. It isn’t lack of order. While the dictionary may define Anarchy to mean that, its because that is how it lives in the culture. But as a political philosophy, it is not that.
There are people who espouse “anarchy” as their way, and they simply want to be justified in acting like assholes, but if you take a look at the psychological position they are taking…they actually need Authority to rebel against, or they wouldn’t be “anarchists”. But then they simply legitimize that authority.
if you aren’t open to the discussion without sticking to other definitions as if they are mine, then I can’t really dialogue with you about it.
Putting words in my mouth isn’t listening.
( and frankly ChrisXP, I respect so many of your posts, it would be a regret to have that disintegrate over this. leave that to the John Witherspoon asshole types)
go fuck yourself!
now,…that is the smartest thing you’ve said all day. Bravo!
Many would if they could
Thomas Paine wouldn’t even have known about hunter/gatherers to make a comparison of what is known TODAY.
That’s like Newton knew of Einstein’s work!!
What we have learned since Thomas Paine is more of our civilizations, not filtered by the fragment lenses of the historical record.
He based his views on what was known of civilization and government in the mid and late 18th century. Today those views have radically changed (especially in piecing together the complexity of the civilizations of the Mayans and Aztecs, let alone the Egyptians/Greeks/Romans). The 19th century Europeans didn’t help by Romanticizing aspects of the Roman Empire that patently didn’t even exist, based on what has been recovered to date!
We now know that early man settled from little bands of about 40 people, to form larger societies. In order for such societies of 40+ individuals to live and work together, laws were created and enforced so they could live without all out bloodshed. These laws, and even cultural taboos were created to keep the masses placid, so they wouldn’t tear each other down.
Anarchy is to throw that glue away. It’ll disassemble the societies, and from that level, civilizations will fall. Returning back to bands of 40 members persuing meat over 100,000 years ago.
Don’t know about you, but I’d prefer my computer, TV, and not trying to kill the next roving band to have supper, thank you.
Chris, you keep trying to define Anarchy through One lense. That isn’t helping you understand where I’m coming from. So if you simply wish to be dominant in the defintion that you hold, this conversation isn’t possible because it isn’t a conversation. You are controlling the definitions in the most narrow sense.
What you are describing as “hunter gatherer” is sometimes called, “Green Anarchism”, and that doesn’t fit with other forms of thought called “anarchism”.
There are many many “schools” of “anarchism”. To try to stick me in the ones that fit your view here will prevent you from hearing me. You keep inserting your view in here as to what Anarchism Is. But you haven’t studied it obviously outside a basic defintion of “tearing society apart”. That is narrow.
So, we can’t converse on this. my loss, not yours.
Cee,
A female 34 year old AA government employee told me today she wouldn’t vote for Hillary because she has “emotional surges”. Who should I report her to?
General Petraeus?
Thank you again for a moment of my youth, Moonbeam, Fugazi rides again!!!!
Cee -
As you obviously tried to do a great deal of searching for something to say, how about answering the question on the table?
The question is whether the Senator from Chicago with lots of indicted and convicted friends has folks working for him who belong to the Nation of Islam (NOI)?
From today’s Dallas Morning News…
What are you saying?? I know a zillion things that Obama’s “backers” have said and done that is derogatory to women (example the “Bros before Hos teeshirt). Has anyone ask Obama to denounce? How much time should Obama spend going around knocking down those comments? Huh, Anyone??
As for people working for Obama (senator or campaign or otherwise), that is a fair question. However, I do take issue with equating NOI with the KKK. The NOI has in large part helps a large segment of the AA prison population become productive (or less destructive) indiviuals back into the population. The KKK has killed countless of people simply for the color of their skin, regilious or sexual preference. The NOI is not the KKK.
However, there are similarities between the KKK and NOI. Both promote what I believe is a overblown importance of themselves and aggressive speech. The difference is the KKK speech manifest in large part to violent; NOI it does not.
Obama should be asked the question.
From the reply that was given to the Larry Johnson question I now know that, Yes Senator Obama WILL have the followers of Isham working for him. Even though Islam has two main goals at this time. The first is the destruction of Isreal. The second is the destruction of the United States. The leaders of Islam have stated many times that the only way to destroy the Great Satan is from within.
Senator Obama was raise in a Moslum country. It would be impossible for him not to have the teachings of Islam ingrained into his being. I personally will not consider Senator Obama as anything other than a threat to this country until I see and hear him make a pledge to this country and none other. I also want to see his hand over his heart during the Pledge of Alliegence to this country.
Am I wrong or did I see the Senator get sworn into the senate with his hand on the Quran instead of the Bible? If he is a Christian why would he do this?
I have been a die hard Democrat my whole life. I am very proud of that fact. This year will be the first time in many years that I will not be supporting the Democratic party. Unless my fears for our country are addressed I will campain in order to have anyone other than Senator Obama elected.
To put this as blunt as possible. Is Senator Obama a member of or a supporter of Islam? If he is elected president will he try to destroy us from within? One thing I do know is that he cannot serve our country and Islam. May God help all or us.
One individual expressing a point of view is not what the NOI is. The NOI is an organization that promotes home grown terrorist activities. No different than the KKK or the Aryan Brotherhood.
You can belong to any organization you so wish, as an individual citizen. But, when you take the oath of office to defend the Constitution of the United States, against “all enemies, foreign and domestic” such entanglements will put you at odds with carrying out that sworn duty.
“I don’t agree with you that people should be denied WORK based on their personal beliefs.”
Really - so I should employ a Joe McCarthy type from from Wisconsin.
I don’t think so!
Not in a political office serving the people
Fiscal,
Are you serious?
Euro,
Name a terrorist incident in the US committed by a member of the NOI.
For one the assassination of Malcolm X.
Euro,
Okay. Internal feud.
Do you have anything more recent that would impact the nation?
The killing of San Francisco reporter Chauncey Baily
Cee wrote:
———————————————–
Okay. Internal feud.
———————————————–
Huh? You’re that cavelier with life and death? By that non-reasoning a GOP operative could assassinate O-Bomba, because it’s a political feud.
Would that be “okay”????
Nice one, EG….Hey, where the heck did Cee go?
Cee,
Obama is free to hire whatever scoundrels and supporters of terrorism he pleases, and we are free to reject him for doing so.
Actually, he is not that free, as there’s laws he must obey like everyone else.
O-Bomba’s taste for company, is like associating with the KKK, the Neo-Nazi and Aryan Nation leaders and followers.
That’s absolutelty disgusting and evil.
Those organizations are protected to exercise their free speech, they’re not protected to take it into government where it can be abused to hurt and kill.
That’s a mile deep canyon in the sand to not cross.
There did not appear to be a lot of conviction behind his so-called denunciation of The Nation of Islam.
You cannot simply dismiss a person’s past, particularly recent past, without understanding that it is a window into this person’s character and beliefs.
What shocks me as a Jew is how unconcerned most Jews are about this man and his past.
What shocks me is that people in general not just jews are unconcerned about him!
He has already turned his back on the African Americans….they just don’t want to believe it. he refused to come off the campaign trail to speak at the State of the Black Union forum…..yet he did get off the campaign trail to make a speech at for his church (www.tucc.org) and that speech is now under investigation for possible finance violations.
In any regard, my point is, what every group you belong to, it is only a matter of time until he turns his back on each one. That is in his make up…..
he should be willing to answer all questions….
I would like to know if Obama did get elected if he will be sworn in on the Bible and if not we as a Nation have become much much too liberal.
—————————————————-
What shocks me as a Jew is how unconcerned most Jews are about this man and his past.
—————————————————-
Secular Jews wouldn’t care much, as secular Christians of religious/ethnic politics. Most Jews in the US are secular or Reform Jews (how else can they dominate the pornography business? No orthodox Jew would touch the filth with a 100ft pole).
The other problem is Jews don’t turn on Jews. Their community is tight on that matter (much like the mafia doesn’t rat out their own), so you can count out on them protesting when their Liberal brethen aren’t angered.
Now if it was someone like Mel Gibson, you’d have Jews in an uproar. Mel touched the victimology nerve, which Jews Left and Right would try to destroy (because you know the entire world hates Jews, and want to burn them alive, right?).
So no, they’re very silent, so silent you can hear a pin drop a mile away.
Oh, just as a reminder: Joe Lieberman, friend of Zionists worldwide, was O-Bomba’s mentor in the senate. So he’s been given another free pass.
This election is a fraud, guys, a complete and utter fraud.
Permission even encouragement to treat non Jews differently is in Deutoronomy
“Barack Obama and Me” (Barack Obama Screamed at Me)
http://www.houstonpress.com/2008-02-28/news/barack-obama-screamed-at-me/3
Details how Obama got to where he is (meteoric rise, did nothing for 6 years in the senate until the president of the senate decided to make him a US Senator and gave him leadership on lots of bills, he had almost no support from other black leaders when he ran in the US Senate primary, when this reporter dared to print that story Obama called him and screamed at him).
Lord knows what kind of hateful emails he will get for this.
Gives an interesting perspective from a real down to earth person. Thanks sam.
You catch the reference to “historical presevation” and “demolition of the projects”?
This is a brilliant piece of journalism. I’ve worked in the Illinois GA during the time this reporter describes, and he could not be more spot on (except for Pate Phillips being a race-baiter). Obama did nothing for years, and as the article says, Sen. Jones said, “I’m going to make me a US Senator.”
This could not be more accurate. You mut understand that Emil Jones, Jr. is one vile human being. He is one of the most corrupt politicians in Illinois, behind only Gov. Blagojevich and Mayor Daley, and he is a famous **shole. I listened to Obama and gave him a chance, but onceI hard hat Jones rhetoric, he lost me.
EVEYONE should read this article. It shows his State Senate experience was all built with help from the President of the Illinois State Senate, which is not just any position. In the Illinois GA, bills do not go anywhere without the approval of leadership. Jones essentially did BHOs work for him.
Kudos to this guy, someone who probably has the conscience to tell the truth about Illinois and Chicago dirty politics.
This website will not open for me.
The Nation of Islam is designated as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/map/hate.jsp
Oops!
Now the Southern Poverty Law Center will be besieged with attacks!
Taters,
I used to contribute to the Southern Poverty Law Center and still have a great deal of respect for Morris Dees. Is he still associated with them?
When they wouldn’t add the following group after some of us were threatend, they never got another penny from me.
http://www.jtf.org/america/america.jews.will.support.black.nazis.htm
http://www.jtf.org/america/america.new.york.times.news.fit.to.twist.htm
http://www.jtf.org/israel/israel.arab.moderates.part.one.htm
Fun site:
according to the SPLC the US border Patrol, the JDL and the Voz de Aztlan are hate groups too.
US Border Patrol? LOL!!
I was right. They lost their way.
Wonder if the Southern Poverty Law Center defines “Aipac” the same way?
Cee–You and McAuliffe need to pay more attention.
The 84 year old woman you cite gave a justifiable reason for her support (or lack thereof). She didn’t think blacks help Latinos. Fair enough. Right or wrong–that’s her opinion.
She did NOT say (as Louis Farrakhan does about whites) that she was not supporting a black candidate because they are ‘less evolved’, ’sneaky’, “sub-human.”etc. etc.
She does not appear to “HATE” anyone–she just thinks the issues she cares about will get more attention from a white woman than a black man. I mean, she’s 84, for chrissakes!– she’s old enough to decide for herself which candidate best meets her needs.
But at any rate , it is NOT parallel construction.
Sprega,
Hillary is a hypocrite. Deal with it.
Hillary is a thematic apperception test. It’s the goddamnedest thing. But handy. As I told a friend, if you want to get a quick read on a person, ask them why they dislike HRC.
Cee how many voters you think vote for someone out prejudice for the other person in the race?
Did that “little old lady” (sprite) threaten anyone? No?
It is a FREE country until you make a name for your self threating entire ethnicities.
And seriously, it does not matter to me who they are. Next they will be branding people with numbers on there wrists. Ooops, I ready saw that on a womens wrist who survived a concentration camp when a teen.
Cee:
As for calling the NOI killing of Malcolm X an “internal” feud, isn’t that just a tad bit dismissive?
I mean would you say that the assassinations of Martin Luther King Jr. or Medgar Evers were merely “internal” feuds between whites and blacks in the south?
Euro,
Did the death of Malcolm X have an impact on you?
It was an internal feud unless the government got one NOI member to kill Malcolm. Did they?
That may be the dumbest thing I’ve read in years.
did the government get an NOI member to kill Malcolm? What the hell are you trying to say? Murder isn’t murder unless the government is involved.
I will ask you one better.
If we are to believe that Barack Obama is going to unify us a country, make us better than we are today and help us see that we are only as strong as our weakest link, then men and women of vision impact us all.
I am certainly no Obama supporter, but the fact that Malcolm X was willing to call out both the financial fraud and moral hypocrisy of the organization’s founder (Elijah Mohammed) and realized that men of all colors could come together in peace; even in the face of death threats, meant that he was willing to put his life on the line to correct a wrong.
That is my problem with Obama. He talks about how he has been right on the war all along. Here’s the problem with that. He had nothing to loose when he gave his speech, as the state legislator of the most liberal district in Illinois at a University of Chicago anti-war rally [talk about preaching to the choir there!]
When you really put yourself on the line you may come out right, or you may come out wrong.
If you never really risk anything you can never be wrong. But, you will truly be right either.
….but you will never be truly right either [correction]
Eurogirl, please read this article:
http://www.houstonpress.com/2008-02-28/news/barack-obama-screamed-at-me/3
Thanks Sam for the link…..
As I said, this is why I could never support Obama. He has no clear compass. He will do whatever he has to do to get ahead; by ruffling as few feathers as possible.
I few weeks back on Bill Moyers show. He had on Sheldon Steele. Steele was very adamant that Obama is very much an empty vessel. He said that most people have a clear understanding of what Hillary and John Edwards stand for. However, Obama’s goal is the acquisition of power without having any real set ideology. Does that remind anyone of the current commander-in-chief?
EUROGIRL..
Grusse…
I would Consider the “New World Order ” Neo Cons..and “One Worlders”..and “Hate Groups” to have Ideology..aanyone who gets an Idea and gathers Two or more People can Start an Ideological Group..or movement.
Hitler, Stalin., Mao …One Person..with All the Power..No Checks and Balances..
The people gave up thier Power,thier constitutions, thier Freedom..
It starts with excuses..to Hate someone, to find a common enemy, talk ultra nationalism, talk Injustice, talk Class Struggles, talk religious or cultural differences, talk racial differences, creat new executive powers, find excuses to control peoples lifes, excuses to take away Due process, excuses to create more police power..excuses to kill, excuses to . arrest..
EXCUSES TO START WARS..NOT MAKE PEACE..
Blessed are the PEACEMAKERS..
People like Bush and Obama get a chance at Power..because they are attracted to or by
those whose Ideology appeals to them the most..then the grooming begins.. They become someone elses Useful Tool..
Its all really a Tribal..and Ancient and repetitive Ritual..mostly a blood sport..
See you at Ring Side..
Thanks for your Comments..Interesting..
You give them too much credit, too much glamour.
They’re scared little shitheads, doing everything they can to avoid looking in the mirror at the stupid arrogant ugly weak dickless man, looking back, they’re all Eric Edelman and Dennis Hastert.
So, you know, if, say, the Saudi oilarab can control Bush, Obama, or other American politicians with their money, who can control the empty Saudi oilarab?
Foreign agents?
Actually YES
My husband was at UMASS, where many blacks had been accepted. The day Malcom X was killed, I drove up to Amherst to pick up my husband. I had my infant daughter with me. Blacks surrounded my vehicle-with some trying to tip it over. I drove off, and that night my husband found an old beat up wreck so he could drive himself.
My baby had picked up whatever energy there was, and was fussy, and would’nt let you put her down for 2 days.
The rioting and unrest certanly was not an “internal fued” in New York, after assassination of Martin Luther King Jr.
MLK was not a member of the nation of Islam nor was he killed by a member of the nation of Islam.
Not the point I making CK. I was recalling the adverse reaction in my neck of the woods growing up. Still, I don’t believe MLK met his tragic fate via a lone gun man.
MLK started talking about class and poverty instead of just talking about race. He was killed.
Malcolm X returned from his Hajj and started talking about class and poverty and inclusion.
He was killed.
It is not a safe thing to talk class or poverty in this country in an inclusionary way. Just would not do to have whites and blacks realize how the american class system works against them.
Josh Marshall just posted on Clinton and the old lady’s words, as if there was a comparison.
I sent him the following email:
“So.. Obama getting support from a domestic terrorist
organization (as designated by SPLC) is equivalent to one old lady’s personal opinion?
Passing on this is your idea of journalistic equivalence?
Have you considered applying for Joe Klein’s job?”
He’s Klein in waiting.
Good opinion-writing is so much more challenging than journalism per se. Almost everyone who concentrates on analysis and opinion writing becomes a hack, eventually. Krugman and Herbert are two exceptions I can think of.
Good opinion writing is good journalism.
They get corrupted by money, and a need to belong, be accepted.
And they never were really talented in the first place.
They’re all Britney Spears, even Kos.
Right?
I’ve had it.
http://joeclaygoesaway.blogspot.com/
I would urge you not to generalize, norrismorris. It’s true that the USA remains a country dominated by male power and preference, and that many women still live their lives under the spell of the media’s portrayal of the idealized woman and dependent on male approval.
Many of Hillary’s supporters contest that norm and are working for her because she is an independent, brilliant, and powerful woman whose candidacy itself undermines the stereotype of women that you describe.
And of course it matters if the Nation of Islam supports Obama. Someone should ask the Mossad; I’m sure they know.
Clearly, you aren’t aware of the LAW which prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion.
http://www.eeoc.gov/types/religion.html
Furthermore, Debbie Schlussel is the jewish equivalent of David Duke. You People are hard core, zionist republicans now. You should probably be voting for huckabee a this point…
Being Muslim and being member of NOI are very different things.
In that they are both recognized religions in this country, the law applies to them both. So, no, you’re wrong.
So the Kansas church that says people are dying in Iraq because of America’s obedience to homosexuals should be welcomed into campaigns and government work? Please. You are arguing a very ignorant point. Its not abot being a Muslim. It’s about hate, and NOI has been preaching that fact for decades.
Maybe there is something to this NOI thing, LJ. Maybe that is why there are so many defending this point and calling us “zionists”.
Perfect!
You made my point for me!
Because fred phelps is a pastor, should all christians be banned from politics? Should catholics be banned from politics because priests have a habit of touching boys? Should Jews be forbidden from politics because of this guy?
http://www.dailymotion.com/BLACKMUSICS/video/x1g6ul_racist-rabbi
etc.
Of course, you will all ignore me now, because I have proven your argument to be childish and inane.
what a boastful little boy you are.
you have the logical circuits of a gnat.
No…just because Fred Phelps calls himself a Christian, don’t make him one, nice try.
But he is a great example. If people from his church wanted to be in Huckabee’s campaign, or office, you’d be a fucking idiot …wait…you are a fucking idiot…
others would be idiots to not be protesting his place in the administration.
You cannot make a distinction. You are so busy nitpicking posts for a shred of troll food, you really have no credit.
nobody suggested muslims couldn’t hold office. Keith Ellison is a muslim. do you see LJ calling for him to be removed? no.
He consideres NOI to be a racist organization, not a religion. The organization itself is what he is pointing out.
And I know many of the NOI in Houston. I have been treated Very well by them each time I covered them as a reporter. I wasn’t treated as a “white devil” but a brother, a friend. they know I reject “white” and will never be a “white” person.
I have covered 3 visits of Farrakhan in Houston. I haven’t heard “white devil” or “the jews” at any of these events. But I know the past comments, so I now there is a problem that the NOI must face if ever wants credibility outside itself.
But LJ is saying that credibility hasn’t been established.
Same thing with William Ayers. If he were to say, “wow, I really fucked up. I was young, and thats no excuse to commit terrorist acts, or plan them, blow up my apartment making bombs” then we wouldn’t be talking about it in this tone.
Ayers has not only not repented for his youthful violence, but he thinks he is still open to it as a possibility.
your gloat don’t float.
Your lumping the whole to defeat the singular or small examples. if this rabbi has an organization that espouses his views, that organization shouldn’t be in Political Office. There is no such law or policy that protects racists from getting into office. the people decide that.
Should he be unable to get a job because he’s a pathetic moron, like you? he should be able to apply, but if he came to my business and laid down this vile crap, i’d fire him. The fact that he is Jewish isn’t the point, git.
You’re a real work of art John “i’m a fucking troll with nothing to offer but nanny nanny boo boo level comments” Witherspoon.
Jesus Christ mate, have a take, not just your gadfly crap.
Chris wrote:
————————————————————————————–
I wasn’t treated as a “white devil” but a brother, a friend. they know I reject “white” and will never be a “white” person.
————————————————————————————–
Huh?
You can’t deny what you are, that’s a fools errand. You can only side more with one side, but you will never escape your DNA.
I don’t believe you understand the mixed messages you’re stating. One hand proclaim to be an anarchist (yet don’t seem to understand what anarchy is and it’s implications); and now stating you’re rejecting “white” on principle, to yet fit into another category.
It’s like experimenting with illicit drugs. Trying to find the right high, in a sea of human misery.
Yes, O-Bomba does have v-e-r-y poor judgement and associations. Yes, O-Bomba is a member of a militant church. Yes, O-Bomba has ties to the NOI. But you identify with O-Bomba, too.
I don’t deny what I am, I don’t accept labelling by others that wish to tell me, “you’re white”. That’s their myopic view of people not mine.
And mixing up race and political positions is not a mixed message. you are mixing them up.
yes, I reject “white” because it is a false construct based simply on skin color. that people live within that illusion is obviously real, but “white people” don’t exist. it is a substitute for European, but Europeans aren’t a monolith either, and the definition for White has kept evolving as time moves on.
The reinforcement of “white” only reinforces Racism itself.
And whatever you do, don’t dare say I’m identifying with O’Bomba. You can do better than that.
no, dude, white is based on genetics. It has to do with melatonin production in the skin. Anarchist is a false construction.
Then, Dr. Race Expert, what Genetic stamp makes you white? because Melatonin varies in people all over the world, in people who aren’t considered “white” either.
Please…oh erudite master, explain your Genetic Whiteness.
melanin, witherspoon, melanin.
Obamanates have bought into the FAST (Facts Are Stupid Things) doctrine.
I love that acronym! Great.
Your ideology doesn’t compute with reality. You can’t deny your DNA. It’s like trying to run from your past. You can travel a billion miles to be away from it, but you can never erase it’s impact on YOU.
Psychology 101!
Society will always judge based on differences. It’s even anthropological in nature. It’s called survival.
You can try to deny whatever parentage you have, but you do yourself no service in trying to escape what you can not. It’s you, be happy with who you are, not what others think you are.
That’s the success of being biracial — not running away from being biracial.
no, dumbshit, my point was there are crazy leaders in every religion, and if you judge everyone in that religion by the crazy leaders, you are a fucking idiot! (which, conveniently for me, you truly are!) Why can’t someone be in the NOI (as you call it) and not believe everything that a leader of said religion believes? [REMOVED BY ADMINISTRATOR] (I guess personal attacks are vogue here, so im just playing along!)
Why can’t KKK members be part of the KKK without believing in their leaders?
Why Nazis without being devoted to Hitler?
Some organizations exist for a reason, and it’s not for brotherly love. You have to be a member and condone their teachings, especially if they’re CULTS. NOI is a cult. As the KKK. As the Nazis. It’s leaders ARE the organizations.
Exactly. And their activities should keep them from holding public office. Its really flattering that John and others think, that I think, I get to control the world, but I don’t, and don’t see it that way. Its what I hold as a value, and from what LJ said, it seems he and I agree in principle.
It isn’t about religion. If you belonged to the extremists enviromental groups that wish to kill people…yeah thats your belief, but you don’t get any support from me to also be elected or appointed or serve in the Government.
Excellent points ChrisXP
Yes, I got your point, but your logic is akin to skeetshooting. You bring up Fred Phelps and his church. I kept to that narrow example and said, if members of his ‘clan’ wanted a job in public office, you’d be an idiot to give them a job in public office.
that isn’t about their religion, its about their hateful antics. just because Fred Phelps is an idiot doesn’t mean Joel Osteen shouldn’t run for office. Both claim to be Christian.
You cannot make distinctions, because you don’t want to make distinctions unless it suits more of your Rightness.
actually you brought up fred phelps. There is no distinction.
Perhaps you dont know this, but debbie is a hard core zionist, racist republican, and you are agreeing with her! in fact, you cite her as a source! It’s literally like citing David Duke as a source on black people.
You People??? burb. So if my religion dictates I must spit on every troll I encounter, is that “discrimination on the basis of religion”.?
no, being a troll is not a religion.
Wow! If anyone else did not get this analogy would you do me the service of letting me know?
I wil go back to watching Ball Room Dancing In HD and reading my new copy of
“Failure of Intelligence” that Mr Johnson recommended. (Thanks, Mr Johnson)
Sure glad there aren’t Shaolin Priest trolls.
6. Never do card tricks for the group you play poker with.
http://www.dysan.net/Weird/show/24.html
it’s a nonsensical statement, unless you mean that trolling is a religion. There is no discrimination against your religion in that statement. So, no, you are wrong again.
Are you outting yourself as a troll, per chance?
Nothing “nonsensical” about that idea! lol
Oh Ok you think is it is ok to spit on anyone I, according to my religion ,perceive as a troll…
My religion igit! You think discrimination is a oneway street? You poor oppressed troll, I am spitting on you because the preacher man said I should, Your more dense than the Plymouth Rock, which was deposited by retreating glaciers. So I gather you are a throw back to the Ice Age.
yeah, where’s the discrimination against your religion? Nowhere.
If true this information is explosive.
Obama has demonstrated a real lack of judgment when it comes to his associates. He doesn’t see a problem until he is confronted.
Both bush and cheney have compromised our National security on several occasions — the outing of Ms. Plame is just one example. We don’t need more of that sort of stupidity in the white house.
What is this — give the keys to the least competent person applying for the job?
The more I learn about Obama — the more warning signs I see.
Obama just keeps handing Rove and Limbaugh all sorts of juicy material to work with. Hell they don’t even have to make it up. All they need to do is google his association with Rezko, Auchi, Obongo, Odinga, Ayres and Farrakhan and his non-existant Senate record and presto! material not only for a little bit of
swiftboating but enough to sink the Titanic.
By the time Rove and company are through with him, they’ll have most Americans terrified of Obama and despising the Democratic party for foisting this corrupt, power hungry fraud on the country.
And his supporters don’t even see it coming.
Too true, and sadly, GOP coat tails could be generated by the GOP’s showing America just how dangerous the Democratic Party has become.
I can see a Democrats for McCain being organized to keep local Dems in office as the national tide sweeps McCain in.
A vote for Obama is tantamount to Electoral suicide.
Sadly, neither do some members of Congress.
Nellie, some members of the congress know it is coming but have been waterboarded with O-Koolaid. Some like Dodd just want money to pay off his debt. For what ever reason the pressure and threats endured are going to have alot of blowback in this cycle. The most common theme I have seen from these endorsements of Senator Obama, is the underline perception that Senator Obma can be manipulated from folks like Kennedy and a slew of others. With Senator Obama’s audacity comes his arrogance, pity when he finds out the office of the president has been co-opted and there is nada he can do about it.
Did O-Bomba call Farrakhan that what he was stating was just “campaign” talk?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080228/ap_on_el_pr/obama_muslim_myth
———————————————————————————————————-
During the debate, Obama repeated his denunciation of Farrakhan’s views, which have included numerous anti-Semitic comments. And, after being pressed, he rejected Farrakhan’s support in the presidential race.
———————————————————————————————————-
He’s so empty, it’s hard to believe anything he says anymore.
So either Cee or John or anyone -
Does the Senator from Chicago currently have Nation of Islam members working for his campaign?
does David Axelrod count?
“Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist party?” “Do you know any communists?” “Are there any communists in your employ?”
For communist, you may, as you wish, substitute: catholics, moslems, jews, Irish, Italians, fundamentalists, liberals, creationists, evolutionists, abortionists, drinkers, smokers, bedwetters, French people, perfidious albionese, moonies, Koreans, illegal immigrants, legal immigrants, Chaldeans? Since when did NQ become JoeMcCarthy reruns? In your pocket, do you have a list too?
There is always somebody to fear. It’s a rank malodourous stench coming from anyone, coming from folks who proclaim liberality doesn’t turn the stench into Channel #5. Fear the black man and woman who stands proud and doesn’t bow and scrape. NOI isn’t a bunch of government dependents, that is enough to make them hateful I guess.
Communism is a threat to democracy, and those who preach intolerance are also a threat to democracy.
Do you even understand the abstract behind that concept?
You seem ignorant, as do the rest of the Bush, Obama supporters, those empty untalented narcissists.
I see Bush on TV this morning, and it looks like he, and Cheney stepped into something they can’t get out of, and they know it, and they’re scared.
Who are they going to turn to, another fey narcissistic twat, someone like Addington, or Blackwater?
Where is the talent, when it goes behind propaganda 101, and others are using you, and your political party, smarter others, to achieve another agenda, speaking of foreign agents?
Stupid republicans, stupid Obama supporters, stupid democrats.
CK,
Sorry - but this is a HATE group - and HATE groups spread violence and chaos. Just like the KKK, White Supremicists etc - So yes it is VERY relevant.
Or do you think the Taliban should also have a right to work, after all they just practice a form of Islam?
Your logic is Waaay off base.
I don’t recall the NOI ever lynching any whites.
Mostly I recall the NOI being in favour of doing things for themselves without allowing whitey to run their show. I think people should work no matter what their belief preferences are.
I remember that when the Taliban were in charge of afghanistan, they won awards for their ability to reduce the production of opium poppies. Now that the USA and NATO run afghanistan, poppy and opium production are quite high. Yet I notice that the NOI is very anti drug use. Drugs being the scourge of the black community and incarceration for drug possession or use being the prime way that white justice controls the young black male population. Being a separatist is not the same thing as being a “hater.” ( unless of course you run the SPLC and don’t get any money from the NOI)
Larry “There are certain groups and individuals that should not be allowed anywhere near an office of public trust like the Presidency. Nazis, KKK, David Duke, and the Nation of Islam.”
Why not include “agents of a foreign nation” Those who have lobbied for a foreign nation. I would include anyone with a dual citizenship. We know that this is real problem.
The only candidate who was brave enough to address this very serious issue was Edwards. He stated “no lobbyist in my administration, and especially no one who has lobbied for a foreign nation”
Neither Obama or Clinton have picked up on this Edwards talking point. Too chicken shit.
Why not also include the Rev. Hagee.
A reverend who wants Israel to be destroyed, a reverend who wants the end times to come real soon now.
A reverend who just endorsed John Keating5 McCain.
But then I forgot McCain gets a pass on everything.
Just ignore the SPLC. On election day a beam of light will shine down on you in the voting booth. Having campaign staffers from the NOI is change to believe in?
Many Muslims abhor the NOI. Are they discriminatory?
Black on black violence doesn’t matter, it’s an internal feud. The fact a person would use violence on members of their own group should disqualify their consideration for elected office. Standards should exist for that.
Farrakhan isn’t just anti Jewish, he’s a gay basher. That’s two patent examples of his mindset.
Now we want people who adhere this same mindset to be staffers on a Presidential campaign and perhaps receive appointments to office? This in the wake of trying to clean out the mess Dubya made of civil service.
Trading one kind of extremism for another isn’t a cure.
If standing aside hatred is standing proud, you’ve really lowered the bar. These people don’t just hate others, anyone who falls out of line their own mindset become justified victims, apparently that is fine with Cee and CK. Exceptionalism as a justification for bias? Violence is okay IF?
White bigots can stand proud in their assumptions, they’re still subject to deserved ridicule. Nobody says they should be considered fit for the Presidency. They may run as a sideshow, but most Americans would not agree with their views or want a candidate to consider their aid in running for highest office.
Exceptionalism abounds.
Is it even realistic Obama would be elected President?
This is the question that we may face. If the Obama tidal way can be sustained. If it hits shore before the fall..the Obamalution is over
All this angst from a poster who calls himself Mr. Murder?
Indulging in a bit of group guilt there Mr. Murder?
You about ready to join old BillO on his “lyniching party”?
White bigot exceptionalism, of course, that’s why Bill Clinton gets a pass, why Larry Johnson gets a pass on his McCarthyism. Why Annie Coulter gets a pass from Abe Foxman on her anti-semitism, has Hillary repudiated Annie’s support?
Hey did you know that John Keating5 McCain is on record as “hating gooks”? Anyone calling him out on his bigotry? Farrakhan has said that he hates Whitey … now there is an acceptable exceptionalism. Farrakhan has said nasty things about judiasm and homosexuality but those are not acceptable exceptionalisms.
The NOI probably contains other prejudiced folks among its membership. Most groups do have some members with ugly prejudices.
Collective punishment for individual guilt is an ugly thing. Are you perhaps guilty for what David Duke believes? Is each and every Moslem guilty for what the 9/11 hijackers did? Is every jew guilty for The King David Hotel bombing? Is every NOI member responsible for what Louis Farrakhan said?
Is every living Cambodian guilty for what Pol Pot did? Every Vietnamese guilty for what McCain’s prison guards did? Every black woman guilty for what Crystal Mangum did?
Which exceptionalism do you prefer Mr. Murder?
Would you assume members of David Duke’s political infrastructure are due benefit of the doubt?
That’s a pretty low threshold.
But we can employ a similar double standard on our behalf, and tolerate ideologues for Obama.
Does the Duke political infrastructure get the benefit of the doubt if they were on McCain’s campaign staff?
We’re no longer a step past ‘killaqueerforchrist’ when we embrace allah’s chosen gaybashers, no?
Would depend on of what they were being accused.
And yes Duke’s people would get a pass from the NQ folks if the Duke senior staffers were on McCain’s staff, just like McCain’s having associated himself with the Haggee folks will get a pass here.
As an american citizen, one does not need the approval of a candidate to support that candidate. Now I would just take it for granted that a group supporting Black separatism would either support a Black candidate against a white or condemn both for being part of the problem. I would not expect a black separatist group to support a Mccain or a Clinton. I didn’t know that Allah had a chosen group of gaybashers. I have not seen a lot of reportage on NOI members being arrested or accused of bashing gays. Mostly I see that sort of stuff from Boston or Wyoming. White, religious, boys bashing white boys. Maybe it is the strictures in the Torah, the New Testament and the Quoran against the wasting of one’s seed that are getting all confused here.
Nice thing about being a secular type is that one can pick and choose the parts of the Books that one wishes to despise and the parts one wishes to praise. Leviticus 17-26 comes to mind.
What upsets me the most about Obama’s supporters is their inabiliity to have a rational discussion based around a parallel construction. When people compare apples to computers and try to justify it by saying that since there’s a computer company called Apple, therefore, we can make a comparison, it makes me question that person’s ability to reason. An 84 year old Hispanic woman commenting on what’s being said in the latino community is clearly not the same as being a member of any organized group noted for hate speak. If you believe that then go take a bite out of your Apple computer and have a nice snack.
As an AA Hillary supporter who is bilingual, I can tell you for a fact stuff like this gets said in the latino community. Does every latino feel this way? No. The same way a lot of whites will not hold Obama’s race against him. But, there are whites who will. Can candidates be responsible for every single supporters point of view? Of course not. But should candidates have paid members on their staff who have opinions and are actively involved in organizations whose ideology is founded on hate against a group or groups? They are free to do so just as supporters are free not to support and vote for elected officials who do. I doubt Jewish voters would vote for someone who had neo-nazi on their staff. And I don’t blame them.
But this 84 year old hispanic woman does not belong to a hate group.She’s relaying what is said amongst her group. And I can verify that many latinos have made those same statements in my presence. So is Hillary suppose to get up and say what, I don’t want the support of any latino who feels that way? That’s as ludicrous as a candidate rejecting the support of blacks many of whom are homophobic.
What people objecting to NOI should consider is this: don’t let this become like the failed plagiarism charge. Like before, you’re asking the wrong questions. Instead, first find out for sure how many NOI people are either paid or volunteer staff. Then ask, what I believe to be the most pertinent question, and one as an AA I would like answered, since when did the NOI and Minister Louis Farrakhan been given mainstream acceptibility to the point that it’s a non issue in a major campaign? That’s certainly news to me. It certainly didn’t work that way for Jesse Jackson and Ben Travis. And what about Arsenio Hall? In the 90’s Hall hosted a popular late night talk show that was doing pretty good in the ratings for a syndicated show until Hall insisted on interviewing Farrakhan on the heels of the famous ‘Million Man March.’ After that interview, advertisers pulled out as sponsors and ultimately his show was cancelled. And it was not due to just a drop in viewers because he had a large AA audience who could care less about Farrakhan. The rug was pulled out from under Hall and his career went down the tubes. So when did folks get so relaxed about NOI and Farrakhan?
Pay attention people: ask the right questions! The length of these comments arguing back and forth over apples and computers should give you a clue that you are not focusing on the right things.
What’s interesting to this AA Hillary supporter is that not only won’t Obama reject or denounce Farrakhan, but also that his commitment to black issues remains a mystery. Supposedly because he doesn’t want to be seen as the black candidate. But yet, he doesn’t mind speculation about his connection to NOI and Farrakhan? How does this not connect him to not just race, but to racial hatred?
I, for one would like the Senator to answer these questions.
P.S.
It’s long been a rumor that Farrakhan and his splinter NOI faction assasinated Malcolm X with ‘cooperation’ from the gov’t. Is this true? Who knows? I do know Malcolm’s widow would have nothing to do with Farrakhan and that many members in the AA community do not like him for this reason. But a lot of younger blacks don’t have this info.
One of the things that bothers Dems about Dr. Farrakhan is that he refuses to be a victim.
And as her removes more and more AAs from victim status he is taking away clients for the old school type of Dem programs. The more sucessful he is the more the comparison to old style programs comes up short for the dems. When blacks are no longer self identifying as victims, there is no need for the old dem ways. In his success is the threat to the “white man’s burden” model of race and people relations.
The repubs hate him because he understands that a disarmed person is a slave. He has no intention of letting blacks be disarmed by the government.
It is this last that puzzles me concerning his support for Senator Obama who is consistently in favour of victim disarmament.
So while his rhetoric is firey and raises hackles, the NOI accomplishments are far from nugatory and every white dem hates his and the NOI successes.
Have you seen the latest figures for imprisonment in the United States. 1% of the total population is imprisoned the vast vast majority for criminalization of what is at worst personal private vices; not crimes against persons or property. But when you dig into the figures, the proportions of the imprisoned versus their proportion in the population is way way off. 11+% of black males between 20 and 34 are in prison, black males between those ages do no make up 11+% of the US population. The ONLY presidential candidate to talk about this issue was Ron Paul and he is for blanket pardoning of folks imprisoned for being victims of victimless crimes in the failed drug war. Farrakhan’s success threaten this source of slave labour for the private and public prison systems. 1 in 100 black women between 35 and 39 imprisoned, 1 in 355 white women in that same age group imprisoned. McCain’s wife gets a few months in a BettyFordOMat for stealing mass quantities of drugs from her own private charity, any random black lady who did the same would do life without in some 6×6 barred room. I don’t have any problem with Dr. Farrakhan leading black men and women out of this kind of situation.
SENATOR OBAMA, PLEASE TELL AMERICA YOUR THOUGHTS ON THIS AMERICAN JUDICIAL INJUSTICE ???
LETS ALL HOPE OUR MEDIA FRIENDS ALSO SHOW AN INTEREST IN REPORTING ON THIS AMERICAN HORROR FACING THESE (TENS OF THOUSANDS) FORGOTTEN AND TRAPPED POORER AMERICANS, AND HOW THIS PRESIDENTIAL CONTENDER HANDLES THIS VERY SERIOUS ISSUE FACING AMERICA’S LATINO AND BLACK AMERICAN COMMUNITIES ????
**WITH 80% OF THE BLACK AMERICAN VOTERS SAYING THEY SUPPORT SENATOR OBAMA IN THIS PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, IT IS ONLY FAIR FOR EVERYONE TO KNOW PRIOR BEING ELECTED OUR NEXT PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES HOW THIS DEMOCRATIC SENATOR TRULY FEELS ABOUT THIS AMERICAN JUDICIAL HORROR CONTINUING TO INFLICT GRAVE HARM ON THE BLACK AMERICAN FAMILIES AND THEIR COMMUNITIES NATIONWIDE ??????
*** WHEN GOD’S FACE BECAME VERY RED ***
THE US SUPREME COURT GAVE ENEMY COMBATANTS FEDERAL APPEAL HC RIGHTS LAWYERS AND PROPER ACCESS TO US FEDERAL COURTS,AND POORER AMERICANS (MANY EVEN ON DEATH ROW) ARE DENIED PROPER FEDERAL APPEAL LEGAL REPRESENTATION TO OUR US FEDERAL COURTS OF APPEAL, AND ROTTING IN AMERICAN PRISONS NATIONWIDE ?????????
**** INNOCENT AMERICANS ARE DENIED REAL HC RIGHTS WITH THEIR FEDERAL APPEALS !
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE $LOWLY FINDING OUT HOW EA$Y IT I$ FOR MIDDLE CLA$$ AND WORKING POOR AMERICAN$ TO FALL VICTIM TO OUR U$ MONETARY JUDICIAL $Y$TEM.
****WHEN THE US INNOCENT WERE ABANDONED BY THE GUILTY ****
The prison experts have reported that there are 100,000 innocent Americans currently being falsely imprisoned along with the 2,300,000 total US prison population nationwide.
Since our US Congress has never afforded poor prison inmates federal appeal legal counsel for their federal retrials,they have effectively closed the doors on these tens of thousands of innocent citizens ever being capable of possibly exonerating themselves to regain their freedom through being granted new retrials.
This same exact unjust situation was happening in our Southern States when poor and mostly uneducated Black Americans were being falsely imprisoned for endless decades without the needed educational skills to properly submit their own written federal trial appeals.
This devious and deceptive judicial process of making our poor and innocent prison inmates formulate and write their own federal appeal legal cases for possible retrials on their state criminal cases,is still in effect today even though everyone in our US judicial system knows that without proper legal representation, these tens of thousands of innocent prison inmates will be denied their rightful opportunities of ever being granted new trials from our federal appeal judges!!
Sadly, the true US *legal* Federal Appeal situation that occurs when any of our uneducated American prison inmates are forced to attempt to submit their own written Federal Appeals (from our prisons nationwide) without the assistance of proper legal counsel, is that they all are in reality being denied their legitimate rights for Habeas Corpus and will win any future Supreme Court Case concerning this injustice!
For our judicial system and our US Congressional Leaders Of The Free World to continue to pretend that this is a real and fair opportunity for our American Middle Class and Working Poor Citizens, only delays the very needed future change of Federal Financing of all these Federal appeals becoming a normal formula of Our American judicial system.
It was not so very long ago that Public Defenders became a Reality in this country.Prior that legal reality taking place, their were also some who thought giving anyone charged with a crime a free lawyer was a waste of taxpayers $$.
This FACADE and HORROR of our Federal Appeal proce$$ is not worthy of the Greatest Country In The World!
***GREAT SOCIETIES THAT DO NOT PROTECT EVEN THEIR INNOCENT, BECOME THE GUILTY!
A MUST READ ABOUT AMERICAN INJUSTICE:
1) YAHOO AND 2) GOOGLE
MANNY GONZALES THE KID THAT EVERYONE FORGOT IN THE CA PRISON SYSTEM. ** A JUDICIAL RIDE OF ONES LIFE !
lawyersforpooramericans@yahoo.com (424-247-2013)