Reasonably Outspoken

2009-09-16T12:38:00.000-07:00

(Sorry for the long hiatus...but I'm back!)

Recently, Michelle Malkin posted a video of a "racially motivated" black-on-white fight on a school bus. She asked where Al Sharpton and the President were during this.

And she has the nerve to call blacks "race-baiters."

I am not condoning violence of any kind. But it is unfair to point out a lone incident when many others are ignored entirely. She ignored the “Jena 6” situation, claiming that the “mainstream media” would cover it (apparently, neither FOX nor MM are considered “mainstream.”). When innocent black men (some of whom were cops themselves) are fatally wounded by white officers, not only does she not sympathize with the dead victims, but criticizes them, or worse, claims the victim “just happened to be black.” I ask this to MM: how many incidences have been reported in the media where whites are accidentally shot and/or killed?
It is not enough to say that MM, who is Asian-American, is simply kowtowing or “sucking up to the white race.” This is just the culture of modern (neo) conservatism. And one of their tenets have always been, when in doubt, blame the minorities.

• Blame the minorities for taking all the jobs in America, but ignore the corporations who are willing to pay these workers below minimum wage and no security.
• Blame the minorities for “cheating the welfare system” (which only makes up 1-5% of taxes) but ignore the billions of dollars that the government gives to corporations (but they don’t consider that welfare).
• Blame the minorities for “The War on Terror,” but ignore the corporations who dump tons of pollutants into our air and water.
They want to get rid of affirmative action, claiming that everyone has free access to everything, or that the election of a (half) black president means that AA is obsolete. Yet, they fail to realize that once AA is no longer an option, the number of minorities accepted in universities drops drastically. Why? These institutions have a way of “determining” the applicants’ race, by means of names, organizations, and locations. They refuse to believe that some minorities are denied or accepted NOT based on “merits,” but the perceived color of their skin.
They advocate racial profiling at airports or other points of interest…as long as the race in question is not white. If 9/11 were committed by 19 white Christian hijackers, would Americans have been so quick to racial profile? Of course not.
They criticize Muslims and Arabs (even though Arabs do not make up the majority of Muslims) to stand up and speak out against those who committed those heinous acts, yet fail to understand the history. Again, I am not condoning any of these. But to under the reason WHY, you must look back at the Crusades—nearly 600 years ago. Then fast forward a few hundred years. America has always had an interest in the Middle East—or, better put, world domination. I wish I were kidding. America wants to build an empire. This has been going on for years, but it only seemed more obvious during the Bush Administration. Every few years, the “empire” needs to attack, invade, or wage war on another country in order to make a profit. Baffled? Do your research (hint: high schools refuse to teach this, for obvious reasons).
For hundreds of years, the Middle East has been “picked on” by the West—especially the U.S. So “they” attacked, to send a message. So, instead of invading and attack others, who not get to the source? There doesn’t need to be an (military) American presence everywhere in the world.
Conservatives ignored the West Virginia 6, while practically applauded Michael Vick’s conviction. And they say racism doesn’t exist.
Conservatives weep when a hapless white female is kidnapped, raped, and/or killed, but turn a blind eye to when those same incidences happen to black women (a later post will be written on the paradox of rape and black women). Or, in the case of the Duke University lacrosse team, couldn’t wait to call her a slew of names (lying black ho, for one).
In conclusion, I ask Michelle Malkin and all of those on the right (as well as a few on the left and center) to apply these same critical views on minorities as the majority.

JD

Discrimination in the Hospitality Industry

2009-04-02T15:12:00.001-07:00

A recent study (that I heard on NPR'S Brian Lehrer Show) shows that racial discrimination is prolific in New York City's high-end restaurants:

Not for Hire
NY Releases Study on Race and Gender in Restaurant Industry.

The study involved a diverse group of servers whom had to undergo an 18-hour course in fine dining. Of course, their resumes had to be "revamped." A white and nonwhite server would submit applications and resumes to the same restaurants. Keep in mind that the minority resumes showed more qualifications and experience than their white counterparts. However, minorites were 23% less likely to either get an interview or hired, as well as more likely to be "probed" during the interview process (not physically probed, silly). One in three minorites had been racially discriminated against, compared with other fields in which the numbers were one in four to five.

Restaurants, naturally, would say that this is so because of accents, and customers complaining that they are unable to understand the servers. However, here are three points to contradict this:

1--white servers with European accents were more likely to get hired than white servers with American accents.
2--black servers with nonregional American accents were still less likely to get hired than their white counterparts.
3--One of the study participants, an African male with a French accent who had years of fine dining experience, still was denied an interview.

Of course, restaurants will say they do not discriminate--saying so would incite law suits. However, many minorities who are hired tend to work in the kitchen--hidden from view. Evern fewer minoritees are hired as top chefs.

Another problem are "ethnic restaurants"--those that hire people of that ethnicity--Turkish or Japanese, for example. They feel that if "others" were to work there--in plain sight--it would dilute the culture experience.

Whatever.

The good news is that many lawsuits are getting filed as a result of this discrimination.

Some argue that these restaurants knows what is best for the restaurant. Since blacks and Latinos, apparently, are more likely to have nonstandard English accents, they do not want those people in a fine-dining restaurant. And yet they'll bend over backwards to hire European accents, because they portray in air of sophistication? I have more of a hard time understanding Europeans than anyone else!

Racism is alive and well, people. And once people understand that, well...whatever.

FAIL Award

2009-03-23T11:43:00.000-07:00

His name is George Lambus. He is the Republican candidate running for mayor in Jackson, Mississippi. Now, I don't care that he's black or that he's a Republican...or hell, the fact that a "black Republican" is no longer an oxymoron (ba da bing!).

It's the fact that he wants to bring back nooses! Why? He claims that when nooses were used, crime rates went down--particularly black on black crime.

He also says that Obama was elected because of black racism and white guilt. What happened to Sharpton? Or Alan Keyes (well, he was a Republican, but whatever)? I will address this so called "black racism"--and if such a thing even exists--on another issue. But I digress.

As an educated person, when I think of nooses, I automatically think of lynching--blacks, in particular. It has been ingrained in my brain over the years. I can't help but think of Jena 6, or others who put nooses on blacks' doors as a warning. I can't help but think of, not even two years ago, controversy started when a Halloween store had a "lynching" decoration--to make it even worse, the person was dark-skinned. And, is usual in racist white fashion (I'm not implying that all whites are racist, but rather racist whites), the owners claimed not to promote racist rhetoric. (This racism denial will be addressed in a later note).

I'm sorry, but there is something unsettling about using nooses as law enforcement. Don't we have the death penalty for that? I could have sworn that we did. I liken this to those that say we need to fine boys for wearing sagging jeans. What I say to that, and nooses, is this: do we need another excuse for the police to constantly brutally attack blacks?

Or, is this just another GOP front? Yes, let's get a black man to spew out his racist rhetoric, as proof to show that the GOP ain't racist. Much like those that think the so-called "War on Terror" isn't racist because Obama is President. Laugh, laugh.

RECAPPING BLACK HISTORY MONTH: THE MISSING PAGES OF WORLD HISTORY

2009-03-02T15:05:00.000-08:00

“I hate when they tell us how far we came to be, as if our people’s history started with slavery.” These are the words of underground Hip Hop artist Immortal Technique from the song “Leaving the Past,” on his second album, “Revolutionary Vol. 2.” The quote articulates what is significantly wrong with the history that is taught in the education system of the United States. It also expresses what is problematic with the celebration of “Black History Month.”

With the passing of Black History month each year, we must ask, how much black history have we really learned? Does the history we learn encompass Black history that predates European imperialism and the African Slave trade? How far back does the historical reporting really go? Does it include the history of blacks in the Caribbean, Central and South America and various other parts of the world? Upon careful evaluation we can see that “Black History Month” should really be classified as “African-American History Month.”

While African American history is very rich and informative, it is still incomplete and only a minute fraction of black history. But why is the sole focus of “Black History Month” concerned with just African Americans? Is there not enough information about Black History before slavery? Certainly this is not the case. There are numerous authors of both African and European decent who have books and materials published about black history that predates slavery. They include John Henrik Clarke, Ivan Van Sertima, George M. James, Basil Davidson, Dr. Yosef Ben-Jochannan, Walter Rodney, Count Volney, John G. Jackson, Chancellor Williams and many others. The works of these historians and scholars reveal history of African people and their many civilizations that go back thousands of years. This is contrary to what is believed by the misinformed masses that are told that African people had no civilization and history before colonialism and slavery.

There is so much information about black history that it is impossible to dedicate one month, yet alone the shortest month of the year to telling it. It could be studied for an entire year and even that wouldn’t be enough. There is just so much that has not been told to the global masses. For instance, history books do not include the fact that the first humans came from the region of the Great Lakes in East Africa, approximately 200,000 years ago, which means the original people were black.

The first civilization in history was created by Ethiopians and its empire encompassed areas such as the Sudan, Egypt, Arabia, Palestine, Western Asia, and India. The Egyptians later came into power in 6000 B.C.E. (before the common Christian era) and went through 27 dynasties which lasted until 300 B.C. During their time they laid the foundations of all aspects of modern civilization and perfected astronomy, music, medicine, chemistry, geometry, calculus, art, rhetoric, and much more. It is also in Egypt that all the world’s religions originated along with their spiritual, moral, and ethical codes which were taught in the Egyptian Mystery System schools. And while Egypt was accomplishing so many great things there was not one European civilization in existence. At that time, the word Europe did not even exist. Why aren’t any of these facts taught in today’s history books or during black history month?

We are not taught about other great African empires such as Kush/Nubia, Mali, Ghana, Songhai and many others. It is in Songhai that the first “world” university was established at Timbuktu, the University of Sankore. It stood for over 500 years until invaders conquered and destroyed the nation. In addition to this, there are also countless African historical figures not included in our history books. We are not educated on people such as Imhotep who lived during the 3rd Egyptian dynasty. He is known as the father of medicine before the Greek Hippocrates and was the world’s first multi-genius, thousands of years before Michael Angelo was born. He was a scribe, chief lector, priest, architect, astronomer and magician. He diagnosed and treated over 200 diseases which included tuberculosis, gallstones, appendicitis and arthritis. He constructed the famous step pyramid of Sakkarah near Memphis. It is he who coined the phrase, “Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we shall die.” He was even worshiped as a God and healer for over 2000 years and as a full deity for another 1000. Early Christians even worshipped him as the “Prince of Peace.” Why is an individual who has impacted the world so significantly left out of the pages of history?

Another great black figure left out of the history books is Queen Hatshepsut from 1500 B.C. who was the first female pharaoh. She was the first great woman of history and ruled Egypt for 21 years. There is also Amehotep IV or Akhenaton from 1375 B.C. who can be viewed as the most remarkable of the pharaohs. “Thirteen hundred years before Christ, he preached and lived a gospel of perfect love, brotherhood, and truth. Two thousand years before Mohammed, he taught the doctrine of the “One God.” Three thousand years before Darwin, he sensed the unity that runs through all living things.” We also aren’t taught about Makeda, The Queen of Sheba who ruled Ethiopia in 960 B.C. She ruled over Sheba, Arabia and Ethiopia and is mentioned in the Bible and the Koran.

We also aren’t educated about Hannibal of Carthage who lived from 247 – 183 B.C. He is recognized as the greatest military strategist of all time. He successfully defended Africa from Roman invasion for many years until he was betrayed by fellow Africans that gave away his military weaknesses. There is also Yakub AL-Mansur who lived from 1149-1199 B.C. He was one of the most powerful Moorish rulers who had dominated Spain for more than five hundred years. His surname, Al-Mansur means “The Invincible” and he defeated all of his enemies and never lost a battle.

Another black figure of importance is King Mutato the Great of The Monomotapa Empire. He ruled in 1440 B.C. and his empire covered Rhodesia, Kalahara, Mozambique and Transvaal in South Africa. Long before the Christian era, his empire utilized iron technology which included 4000 active mines with gold as the leading export commodity. This civilization was highly developed and had architecture that rivaled that of the great pyramids in Egypt. Furthermore, Mutato had a plan to unite all the blacks throughout his empire to counter the aspirations of their enemies who wanted them to fight each other with hopes of weakening one another so that the enemy could gain access to their wealth. Unfortunately, Mutato passed away and his plans never came to fruition.

Other key information left out of history books is the fact that slavery did not exist in Africa before the invasion of people from Western Asia such as the Arabs. It was the Arabs who first introduced such things to Africa. Later the Greek and the Roman invasions also imposed such practices on the Africans. When the topic of the African slave trade is brought up, miseducated people of various backgrounds argue that slavery existed in Africa before Europeans got there. However, if they went farther back into history, they would see that it was not so, and it was the Arabs that introduced it to the continent.

In addition, with the invasion of each group alien to the region, the conquerors stole all aspects of African culture which they incorporated into their own to form their civilizations. Many Greeks and Romans were educated by the Egyptian Mystery School system and they later plagiarized and claimed all that that they learned from Egyptian teachers as their own work. What most people are also unaware of, is that these were the same people who renamed the land of Africa. Egypt was originally called Kemet/Ta-Merry which was later renamed by the Greeks to describe the darkness of the people who lived there. This is also the case for Ethiopia. The continent was originally called Alkebu-Lan, but it was later changed to Africa, named after a Roman province located in the northern region of the land. It should also be noted that the original people of Northern Africa were dark skinned, but after numerous invasions by foreign nations the skin tone of the people became whiter and over populated by Arabs. To quote West Coast rapper Crooked I, “I’m black like the ancient Egyptians, before European historians came and changed their description.”

Other interesting bits of history that aren’t reported is that Africans came to the Americas long before Columbus and other Europeans. There are numerous statues of African figures in Central and Southern Africa along with archaeological evidence to show African presence in those areas that predates European engagement. The Africans even engaged in trade with the Native Americans indigenous to the land. Some of these Natives even went back to Africa and established communities there along side the Africans. Besides the Americas, Africans also traveled to various parts of Asia and engaged in peaceful trade with the inhabitants. There is also archaeological evidence to show the African presence in those areas that helped develop and set the foundation of those civilizations. The work of scholars such as Ivan Van Sertima details this history.

Now, the stated information is just a fraction of the African/black history that is not included in our history books and highlighted during black history month. The fact that such information is left out of historical commentary has had a tremendous negative impact on the entire world and on people of African decent in particular. When you have no knowledge of your history, you have no true identity of yourself. The elimination of black people’s past history was one of the key elements of the social engineering masterminded by the infamous “Willie Lynch Letter.” If more blacks knew their history they would understand the path their ancestors were on before they were interrupted by Arabs and Europeans. They would then be motivated to get back on track and reclaim their position on the world stage.

On a larger scale, if more people in the world knew this information in earlier times, it would have been difficult to justify the practice of racism which has grown to be so prevalent today. The earlier Europeans such as the Greeks and Romans had no such biases and even encouraged intermingling of Romans and Africans to expand their empire. There were many Africans in high positions in there society. The Romans had three black Popes, Victor I, Militiades and Gelasius. Lusius Quietus was an African Moor who served as a great Roman general who was later named as the successor to Roman Emperor Trajan. A third of the Roman senate was of African origin near the end of the 2nd century. Emperor Lucius Septimius Severus, another African, ruled Rome from 193-211. So, if this knowledge was included in the world’s historical report, the notion of white supremacy and the inferiority of blacks would not have been believable. Less whites would have been brainwashed to view Africans as barbarians, savages and infidels; and less of them would have went out and committed the atrocities they did against black people. Along with that, blacks of the African Diaspora who ignorantly distance themselves from anything associated with the continent will take pride in identifying with their history and their African brothers and sisters. Furthermore, people of color such as Hispanics/Latins, and Indians would have no problem recognizing the African heritage that is apart of their lineage. It is for this reason why it is important that this information be disseminated to the masses to counter the evils that have prevailed due to its suppression.

Now, while there is much information missing from world history and Black history month, we must also take into account that the United States is a country made up of immigrants. All these other groups should be given a month to disseminate information about their contribution to world history. However, this is problematic because there aren’t enough months in the year to accomplish this. The only solution is to see to it that the history books encompass everyone’s history and give an accurate and balanced report of what all peoples have done throughout time.

With the critique and history lesson that has been presented since black history month is obviously problematic and incomplete, we must ask ourselves what has it accomplished? In my honest opinion, it has accomplished nothing. It has served more as a way of pacifying black people to let them feel that equality has been achieved in the United States. The mere fact that Black History month has to be celebrated shows that there still is a tremendous problem with the system and its education in particular. If equality was truly achieved then all the facts I articulated would be taught in all schools throughout the nation along with the history of all other people that make up the demographics of the nation. Black people and all oppressed people should not be satisfied when their oppressors throw a few crumbs under the table to pacify their cries for equality. The fight and demand for equality must go on until it is clear that there is a level playing field and that everything is fair and balanced.

contributed by Xavier W

Blacks and Welfare: The Truth

2009-02-14T10:15:00.000-08:00

This post brought to you by

I, personally, am sick and tired of hearing certain whites complaining about how they shell out their hard-earned money to help out others on welfare who a) don't work, b) expect a government handout, c) pop out babies (usually with black-sounding names), and d) tend to be black and/or Hispanic. This really, really irritates me.

But what irritates me more is the fact that these people are wrong, and they spew out their uninformed opinions as if they were fact. Let's look at the statistics:

Myth: People on welfare are usually black, teenage mothers who stay on ten years at a time.

Fact: Most welfare recipients are non-black, adult and on welfare less than two years at a time.

According to the statistics, whites form the largest racial group on welfare; half of all welfare recipients leave in the first two years; and teenagers form less than 8 percent of all welfare mothers.

Race

--------------

White 38.8%

Black 37.2

Hispanic 17.8

Asian 2.8

Other 3.4

Time on AFDC

---------------------------

Less than 7 months 19.0%

7 to 12 months 15.2

One to two years 19.3

Two to five years 26.9

Over five years 19.6

Number of children

-------------------

One 43.2%

Two 30.7

Three 15.8

Four or more 10.3

Age of Mother

------------------

Teenager 7.6%

20 - 29 47.9

30 - 39 32.7

40 or older 11.8

These were stats that came out in '94, but things can rarely change dramatically in a decade.

source: http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-welfareblack.htm

Also, the majority of welfare recipients MUST work. If you apply for temporary assistance, you must a)either have a job,

or b) look for a job. If you are having difficulty finding a job, the government will help you find one. If they find out that you

are NOT working and have no INTENTION on working, they will stop giving you money. They may even ask for that money

back. I know this because I applied for food stamps last year. Why? Because I didn't have enough money to pay for the rent and feed myself.

It's a very tough decision to make, so there were some days when I had to forgo food.

Also, the majority of people that are collecting public assistance are children. That's right: CHILDREN. The parents of these children

(of any race) have to decide between paying the bills, rent, etc., and providing food for their children. The majority of people collecting

welfare are white women. Most welfare recipients do NOT have more children that those that are on not on welfare. The turnover

rate for welfare is very high.

The idea that people who are on welfare are lazy and just ASKING for a handout is ludicrous. One can barely survive on getting

welfare. Remember: the government gives you only what you need. For instance, had they not cut me off (for reasons out of my

control), I could have received $250 a month. Which sounds like a lot, but given that the price of a gallon of milk is $4, that money will dry

up quickly.

To be honest, I don't care who makes up the majority of the welfare program. There is a reason why these people are on it. Most

people are hard workers who, for some reason or other, fell into bad times. And since we are in a deep recession right now (with

a possibility of going into a full blown Depression by the end of the year), can anyone blame them? People are getting laid off

left and right, up until the summer of last year, gas prices were ridiculously high, insurance and food have skyrocketed. What's wrong

with helping people out?

But no...some people insist on getting a scape goat. Even though welfare makes up a small percentage of government spending (last I

checked, it was around 1%), they insist that "we" spend far too much on welfare and that "we" (the greedy blacks, of course) greedily take

more than our share of the pie (which we don't). We spend far more on Medicare and Social Security (both of which are welfare,

but certain people don't see it that way). Certain people need to victimize other groups as reasons for their oppression.

While at the same time, they have no problem spending their "hard-earned" money to giant CEOS and large corporations. That's right...

where do you REALLY think they were getting their money from? And this is before the $700 billion bailout. The government calls

these "subsidies." Did you know that the gov't pays some small farmers a tiny percentage to NOT grow crops? This is to make

room for genetically-modified, inorganic, plastic tasting food that you find at WalMart. This, folks, is real welfare. But certain

people don't complain about that (until now, when they realize that they are getting duped over and over and over again). Because these

CEOS and the large majority of this corporations are comprised of whites, they don't see that as an issue. But can you honestly tell me

that these people are working harder than a decent family that makes enough money to barely get above the poverty line? Something tells

me no. But do you see the hypocrisy? Last week, the GOP revealed its true colors when they revealed that they think it's unfair

to put a cap on CEOS pay. For those of you that don't know, the standard is $500,000 per year, and this is WITHOUT bonuses.

Most Americans, I can say, could live more than comfortably on that a year. Interesting how they think there shouldn't be a maximum

wage, but there should be a minimum wage. Here in New York, it's $7.15. The average apartment is over $1,000. Do the math.

The maker of that T-shirt, as well as countless others, are very, very ignorant. And that ignorance is damaging. To say that blacks are lazy, un-

productive, and are baby factories is damaging.

Bottom line: it's okay to say that blacks are lazy and are dependent on welfare. But it's not ok to blame those that, because of so-called "free

markets," relentless spending, and too much lobbying, have caused us to get into the mess we're in in the first place.

But it doesn't stop there. Some have had the nerve to say it's "our" fault because we have been living beyond our means. While

that may be true, surely the banks, etc., had the discretion to decline us, yes? But they show discretion now, in the means of not

offering me ten plus credit card offers a month. It's now down to one or two.

contributed by JD