Monday, April 30, 2007
$4 gas -- because we say so!
This links to an article that details how the oil companies are driving gas prices higher.
Cars 'r coffins -- pedal more.
Cars 'r coffins -- pedal more.
Thursday, April 26, 2007
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
Black Teen in Texas gets 7 years prison for pushing hall monitor
A white girl in the same town burned down her mother's home earlier. Her punishment? Probation.
20 light years away, the most Earthlike planet yet - International Herald Tribune
20 light years away, the most Earthlike planet yet - International Herald Tribune
Sounds like a human place to blast our impeachable refuse.
Sounds like a human place to blast our impeachable refuse.
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Monday, April 23, 2007
Comedian tanks at white house press dinner
More people walked out this year on Rich Little than did last year on Stephen Colbert.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Yaaaaayyyyyyyyy!
Kucinich to file articles of impeachment against Darth Cheney....but what about his Texas sock puppet?
Monday, April 16, 2007
Have some Za
"...Today, the most perfect situation exists in the U.S. It is the world’s largest liquid slave economy where U.S. African salve descendants have a value of some $650 Billion a year, 95% of which goes to the slave master and other ethnic groups who have been permitted to dip o who have manipulated their way into the world’s largest liquid slave economy. Slavery will exist as long as the master-slave relationship exists..."
Apologies without Reparations
SLAVERY IS NOT history but a part of the West's economy today, says reparations activist Omowale Za.
Twin Cities Alert! Ugly situtation demands community response
Also see: http://www.cuapb.org/MariaInamaguaCase.asp
UGLY SITUATION IN WILLMAR DEMANDS COMMUNITY RESPONSE: RALLY TONIGHT!
[The following is from Centro Campesino and MN Immigrant Freedom Network and highlights an urgent situation. Scroll down for info on tonight's rally, which CUAPB endorses. Please take action today!]
ICE is currently doing raids in Willmar! Please take action to stop the deportations and racial profiling!
Last night, over 150 people attended a community meeting organized by RAICES, a community based group in Willmar Mn. The community came together to stand strong and seek legal advice from Centro Legal and allies. This community meeting reported that for the fourth day in a row, ICE agents have been terrorizing the Willmar community. Currently, there are three buses roaming the city getting ready to take our community members away. ICE is tearing families apart, children as young as two years old have been separated from their mothers. Other young ones in the meeting shed tears in fear their loved ones would be taken away.
Allegations that ICE agents are entering homes without warrants for detention or search have been confirmed by families present at last night's RAICES community meeting. The West Central Tribune reports that federal agents were using racial profiling to ask Latino looking people for their identification papers outside of Wal-Mart.
Take these actions:
1) Call Tim Counts, ICE Community Relations officer at 952-853-2602 and demand these raids be stopped.
2) Come to a community gathering and candle light vigil TONIGHT to call for a moratorium on deportations and raids in our Minnesota communities.
Stop the Deportations Rally and Vigil
Sunday, April 15, 2007
6:30 p.m.
Ramsey County Jail
425 Grove Street, St. Paul
Bring stuffed animals, family photos, flowers and candles to value our families and bring hope to the children and people who have been torn apart by recent immigration raids. Let's stand together for humane immigration reform and against terrorizing ICE activity. This event is being organized by Jewish Community Action (JCA), Minnesota Immigrant Rights Action Coalition (MIRAC) and Minnesota Immigrant Freedom Network (MIFN).
Bear in mind that Maria Inamagua died in the Ramsey county jail from lack of medical care. Her crime? She was being detained for an immigration violation. We have worked with a number of cases in which medical care was withheld at that jail. Jail conditions will be part one of the issues raised at this event.
Mumia Abu-Jamal is a political prisoner on death row. He was convicted of killing a Philadelphia cop but significant evidence (including the confession of another man) shows that he is innocent. As a radio and print journalist, Mumia reported truthfully about police brutality and was dubbed "voice of the voiceless" by his community--with cops gunning for him ever since. His case is moving into its final appeals.
As supporters of Mumia Abu-Jamal prepare for his case to go back to court on May 17th in Philadelphia, Ramona Africa is coming to town next week to give an update on Mumia's case and to raise badly needed funds for his legal defense.
Dinner and Discussion with Ramona Africa
Thursday April 19th, 6 p.m.
Jack Pine Community Center
2815 E Lake Street, Minneapolis
$5-$15 dollars suggested--no one turned away for lack of funds
Vegetarian meal included
Ramona Africa is the only adult survivor of the May 13th, 1985 bombing of the MOVE family by the Philadelphia police and city officials. Ramona was immediately taken into custody and eventually convicted on trumped-up charges of riot and conspiracy. She spent the next seven years in prison. Immediately upon her release, she rejoined her family's struggle to free all remaining MOVE political prisoners, including the MOVE9 and Mumia Abu-Jamal. This event is part of a tour meant to raise awareness about the MOVE 9, who are preparing for the possibility of parole in 2008.
Sponsored by the Twin Cities Eco-Prisoner Support Committee. For more information: ecoprisoners.googlepages.com or (612)729-2837
Police Deaths, Planting Petunias, and Procreation
Marie De Santis, Women's Justice Center
http://www.justicewomen.com/pw_petunias.html
Everyday police are out there risking their lives for you and me. Or are they really? And what urgent difference does it make to you, your sisters, your daughters, and friends?
Before reading any further, try this quick test. Rank the following six occupations according to their rate of on-the-job fatalities, starting from the most dangerous to the least dangerous: air pilot, police officer, truck driver, electrician, construction laborer, gardener (non-farm). Chances are, if you've ever watched TV, or listened to cops defend their conduct, or read newspaper editorials supporting the police, or heard broadcasts of the funeral orations in memory of a slain officer, or just plain lived on the planet, chances are you flunked the test royally.
Here is the correct ranking from the U.S. Department of Labor, along with a few other occupations to give you an idea of the range. (From U.S. Department of Labor Occupational Fatalities per 100,000, Year 1999.)
Commercial Fishermen 162
Timber Cutters 154
Air Pilots 65
Construction Laborers 37
Garbage Collectors 34
Truck Drivers 28
Electricians 12
Gardeners (non farm) 11
Police 11
Carpenters 7
So the real deal is this, police officers don't lay their lives on the line any more than the person who plants the petunias on your patio. The numbers vary some from year to year, but the ranking of fatality rates remains basically the same as you see it here.
It's said that you can't fool all the people all of the time, yet this highly exaggerated myth of the dangerousness of police work has come pretty close to doing just that. The entire American public has been bamboozled with this myth for a very long time. As you can see just from the abbreviated list of occupations above, many, many other workers, including many who work in public service, suffer far higher fatality rates than police.
And when, for example, the city gardener dies on the job serving you, there's no fanfare, no flags flown at half mast, no five foot flower monuments flown in from near and far. No motorcycle caravans of gardeners swarming into the funeral from seven neighboring states. No headlines at the top of the news for three days running. No city and state officials clamoring for a place to mourn at the casket.
What is it with the police? Their familiar refrains are known in every town and hamlet of the nation. "Our wives have to worry everyday whether of not we're going to come home at night." Doesn't the gardener's spouse have to worry just as much? "We never speak out against another cop, because we depend on each other for our lives." Don't gardeners depend on each other when rock walls shift, structures collapse, or machinery turns rogue? Of course they do, just as much, and as often, and as life-and-death, as the police.
But different from gardeners, police have immense powers over people, and too often can misuse that power to create myths to get more power. Here's a couple of first thoughts to start the debate as to why this myth of police dangerousness exists and how it harms our communities.
1. By cultivating a hyper-inflated myth of heros sacrificing their lives for you, police have created a shield of public veneration to defend against criticism of any misdeed. Who then can blame police for building arsenals against the citizens, for firing at first blink, for mafia-like codes of silence? Who then can refuse police funding requests for ever more militarized arms?
2. The myth of dangerousness keeps women out of policing, and keeps police power concentrated in the hands of men. The supposed danger of police work is one of the main reasons women give for not going into policing. Women lose out on a great job, and communities lose out on the exceptional skills women bring to the job, not the least of which is dramatically lower rates of excessive use of force, and the better communication skills that de-escalate violence and save lives.
3. The myth of police dangerousness again and again attracts the wrong kind of people to the job. A hyper male ego is the last thing that's needed at ground zero on the critical fault lines of society's problems. And it's the last thing that's needed to handle crimes of violence against women which accounts for about a third of all police calls.
4. The myth of the dangerousness of policing keeps police wives scared to death and under control. How do you get up the nerve to insist that the warrior hero who faces death around every corner do his share of scrubbing the bathroom floor?
5. Too many police officers believe this myth themselves, and reach for the gun at the first blink of an eye, and then later, all can be explained with the refrain, "Our lives are on the line."
Here's a couple other facts that should be taken into account. The majority of police on-the-job fatalities are not caused by bad guys shooting at the cops. The majority of police on-the-job fatalities are caused by vehicle accidents.
And maybe this next fact is most pertinent of all to the question of how, and why, and what difference it makes who society selects for its heros. Although the Department of Labor doesn't include motherhood as an occupation, other national studies show that childbearing in the U.S. has a fatality rate on a par with policing.
Feel free to photocopy and distribute this information as long as you keep the credit and text intact.
Copyright Marie De Santis, Women's Justice Center, www.justicewomen.com
UGLY SITUATION IN WILLMAR DEMANDS COMMUNITY RESPONSE: RALLY TONIGHT!
[The following is from Centro Campesino and MN Immigrant Freedom Network and highlights an urgent situation. Scroll down for info on tonight's rally, which CUAPB endorses. Please take action today!]
ICE is currently doing raids in Willmar! Please take action to stop the deportations and racial profiling!
Last night, over 150 people attended a community meeting organized by RAICES, a community based group in Willmar Mn. The community came together to stand strong and seek legal advice from Centro Legal and allies. This community meeting reported that for the fourth day in a row, ICE agents have been terrorizing the Willmar community. Currently, there are three buses roaming the city getting ready to take our community members away. ICE is tearing families apart, children as young as two years old have been separated from their mothers. Other young ones in the meeting shed tears in fear their loved ones would be taken away.
Allegations that ICE agents are entering homes without warrants for detention or search have been confirmed by families present at last night's RAICES community meeting. The West Central Tribune reports that federal agents were using racial profiling to ask Latino looking people for their identification papers outside of Wal-Mart.
Take these actions:
1) Call Tim Counts, ICE Community Relations officer at 952-853-2602 and demand these raids be stopped.
2) Come to a community gathering and candle light vigil TONIGHT to call for a moratorium on deportations and raids in our Minnesota communities.
Stop the Deportations Rally and Vigil
Sunday, April 15, 2007
6:30 p.m.
Ramsey County Jail
425 Grove Street, St. Paul
Bring stuffed animals, family photos, flowers and candles to value our families and bring hope to the children and people who have been torn apart by recent immigration raids. Let's stand together for humane immigration reform and against terrorizing ICE activity. This event is being organized by Jewish Community Action (JCA), Minnesota Immigrant Rights Action Coalition (MIRAC) and Minnesota Immigrant Freedom Network (MIFN).
Bear in mind that Maria Inamagua died in the Ramsey county jail from lack of medical care. Her crime? She was being detained for an immigration violation. We have worked with a number of cases in which medical care was withheld at that jail. Jail conditions will be part one of the issues raised at this event.
___________________________________________________________
MUMIA ABU-JAMAL HEADS BACK TO COURT: RAMONA AFRICA COMING TO TOWNMumia Abu-Jamal is a political prisoner on death row. He was convicted of killing a Philadelphia cop but significant evidence (including the confession of another man) shows that he is innocent. As a radio and print journalist, Mumia reported truthfully about police brutality and was dubbed "voice of the voiceless" by his community--with cops gunning for him ever since. His case is moving into its final appeals.
As supporters of Mumia Abu-Jamal prepare for his case to go back to court on May 17th in Philadelphia, Ramona Africa is coming to town next week to give an update on Mumia's case and to raise badly needed funds for his legal defense.
Dinner and Discussion with Ramona Africa
Thursday April 19th, 6 p.m.
Jack Pine Community Center
2815 E Lake Street, Minneapolis
$5-$15 dollars suggested--no one turned away for lack of funds
Vegetarian meal included
Ramona Africa is the only adult survivor of the May 13th, 1985 bombing of the MOVE family by the Philadelphia police and city officials. Ramona was immediately taken into custody and eventually convicted on trumped-up charges of riot and conspiracy. She spent the next seven years in prison. Immediately upon her release, she rejoined her family's struggle to free all remaining MOVE political prisoners, including the MOVE9 and Mumia Abu-Jamal. This event is part of a tour meant to raise awareness about the MOVE 9, who are preparing for the possibility of parole in 2008.
Sponsored by the Twin Cities Eco-Prisoner Support Committee. For more information: ecoprisoners.googlepages.com or (612)729-2837
___________________________________________________________
BUSTING THE "COPS HAVE A DANGEROUS JOB" MYTHPolice Deaths, Planting Petunias, and Procreation
Marie De Santis, Women's Justice Center
http://www.justicewomen.com/pw
Everyday police are out there risking their lives for you and me. Or are they really? And what urgent difference does it make to you, your sisters, your daughters, and friends?
Before reading any further, try this quick test. Rank the following six occupations according to their rate of on-the-job fatalities, starting from the most dangerous to the least dangerous: air pilot, police officer, truck driver, electrician, construction laborer, gardener (non-farm). Chances are, if you've ever watched TV, or listened to cops defend their conduct, or read newspaper editorials supporting the police, or heard broadcasts of the funeral orations in memory of a slain officer, or just plain lived on the planet, chances are you flunked the test royally.
Here is the correct ranking from the U.S. Department of Labor, along with a few other occupations to give you an idea of the range. (From U.S. Department of Labor Occupational Fatalities per 100,000, Year 1999.)
Commercial Fishermen 162
Timber Cutters 154
Air Pilots 65
Construction Laborers 37
Garbage Collectors 34
Truck Drivers 28
Electricians 12
Gardeners (non farm) 11
Police 11
Carpenters 7
So the real deal is this, police officers don't lay their lives on the line any more than the person who plants the petunias on your patio. The numbers vary some from year to year, but the ranking of fatality rates remains basically the same as you see it here.
It's said that you can't fool all the people all of the time, yet this highly exaggerated myth of the dangerousness of police work has come pretty close to doing just that. The entire American public has been bamboozled with this myth for a very long time. As you can see just from the abbreviated list of occupations above, many, many other workers, including many who work in public service, suffer far higher fatality rates than police.
And when, for example, the city gardener dies on the job serving you, there's no fanfare, no flags flown at half mast, no five foot flower monuments flown in from near and far. No motorcycle caravans of gardeners swarming into the funeral from seven neighboring states. No headlines at the top of the news for three days running. No city and state officials clamoring for a place to mourn at the casket.
What is it with the police? Their familiar refrains are known in every town and hamlet of the nation. "Our wives have to worry everyday whether of not we're going to come home at night." Doesn't the gardener's spouse have to worry just as much? "We never speak out against another cop, because we depend on each other for our lives." Don't gardeners depend on each other when rock walls shift, structures collapse, or machinery turns rogue? Of course they do, just as much, and as often, and as life-and-death, as the police.
But different from gardeners, police have immense powers over people, and too often can misuse that power to create myths to get more power. Here's a couple of first thoughts to start the debate as to why this myth of police dangerousness exists and how it harms our communities.
1. By cultivating a hyper-inflated myth of heros sacrificing their lives for you, police have created a shield of public veneration to defend against criticism of any misdeed. Who then can blame police for building arsenals against the citizens, for firing at first blink, for mafia-like codes of silence? Who then can refuse police funding requests for ever more militarized arms?
2. The myth of dangerousness keeps women out of policing, and keeps police power concentrated in the hands of men. The supposed danger of police work is one of the main reasons women give for not going into policing. Women lose out on a great job, and communities lose out on the exceptional skills women bring to the job, not the least of which is dramatically lower rates of excessive use of force, and the better communication skills that de-escalate violence and save lives.
3. The myth of police dangerousness again and again attracts the wrong kind of people to the job. A hyper male ego is the last thing that's needed at ground zero on the critical fault lines of society's problems. And it's the last thing that's needed to handle crimes of violence against women which accounts for about a third of all police calls.
4. The myth of the dangerousness of policing keeps police wives scared to death and under control. How do you get up the nerve to insist that the warrior hero who faces death around every corner do his share of scrubbing the bathroom floor?
5. Too many police officers believe this myth themselves, and reach for the gun at the first blink of an eye, and then later, all can be explained with the refrain, "Our lives are on the line."
Here's a couple other facts that should be taken into account. The majority of police on-the-job fatalities are not caused by bad guys shooting at the cops. The majority of police on-the-job fatalities are caused by vehicle accidents.
And maybe this next fact is most pertinent of all to the question of how, and why, and what difference it makes who society selects for its heros. Although the Department of Labor doesn't include motherhood as an occupation, other national studies show that childbearing in the U.S. has a fatality rate on a par with policing.
Feel free to photocopy and distribute this information as long as you keep the credit and text intact.
Copyright Marie De Santis, Women's Justice Center, www.justicewomen.com
___________________________________________________________
Communities United Against Police Brutality
3100 16th Avenue S
Minneapolis, MN 55407
Hotline 612-874-STOP (7867)
Meetings: Every Saturday at 1:30 p.m. at Walker Church, 3104 16th Avenue South
http://www.CUAP
Communities United Against Police Brutality
3100 16th Avenue S
Minneapolis, MN 55407
Hotline 612-874-STOP (7867)
Meetings: Every Saturday at 1:30 p.m. at Walker Church, 3104 16th Avenue South
http://www.CUAP
Dr. Marable: Beyond Vietnam to the madness of Iraq
by Dr. Manning Marable
Beyond Vietnam to the madness of IraqApril 16, 2007On April 4, 1967, exactly one year to the day before his assassination, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. delivered his eloquent yet controversial address, “Beyond Vietnam,” at New York City’s Riverside Church. In his sermon, Dr. King announced his moral and political reasons for opposing the U.S. military escalation in Vietnam. “I come to this magnificent house of worship tonight,” King began, “because my conscience leaves me no other choice.” King noted that the presence of hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops in southeast Asia had only led to the deaths of thousands of innocent victims, and had cost American taxpayers billions of dollars. “A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death,” King observed. It was impossible for the administration of then-President Lyndon Johnson to carry out his “Great Society” social programs, or his “War on Poverty,” when billions of dollars were being reallocated to destroy Vietnamese villages, towns and homes. As journalist Bob Herbert recently noted, King’s “Beyond Vietnam” address “unleashed a hurricane of criticism.” Both the NAACP and black leaders such as Bayard Rustin sharply criticized King for “stepping out of his perceived area of expertise, civil rights, to raise his voice against the evil of the war.” The New York Times joined these critics, proclaiming in an editorial headline, “Dr. King’s Error.” On April 1 this year, hundreds gathered again at Riverside Church, to celebrate the fortieth anniversary of King’s “Beyond Vietnam” address, and to link his analysis to the current national debate over U.S. military involvement in Iraq. The event featured keynote addresses by the Reverend Dr. C. T. Vivian, a veteran civil rights leader; the Reverend Dr. Joseph E. Lowery, former leader of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference; and myself. Also speaking were Mrs. Kadiatou Diallo, the mother of the martyred victim of New York police brutality, Amadou Diallo; the current SCLC President, Charles Steele, Jr.; and the Reverend Dr. Thomas Stiers, Riverside Church’s interim Senior Minister. At one point in the Riverside Church program, scores of young people read sections of Dr. King’s “Beyond Vietnam” speech to the congregation. It was difficult to remember that Martin was talking about the tragedy of Vietnam, rather than the Iraq civil war today. King declared: “I speak for those whose land is being laid waste, whose homes are being destroyed, whose culture is being subverted … I speak as a citizen of the world, for the world as it stands aghast at the path we have taken. I speak as an American to the leaders of my own nation. The great initiative in this war is ours. The initiative to stop it must be ours.” For Martin, it was not too late for America to halt the madness of militarism and bloody destruction. “If we will make the right choice,” he affirmed, “we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our world into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood and sisterhood.” How would Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. respond to the current Iraq War? King would be deeply troubled by the recent opinion polls of Iraqis conducted in January 2007, that coincided with President Bush’s so-called “surge” of U.S. military forces. Over 70 percent of all Iraqis want Americans to leave their country within months, not years. More than 60 percent of Iraqis stated that they agreed with “the killing of U.S. troops.” President Bush insists that he alone, as Commander in Chief, is responsible for conducting war policy for the United States. King would rightly declare that Bush is ignorant of American history, and the powers of Congress as outlined in the U.S. Constitution. During both the Mexican-American War of 1846-1848, and the Civil War in 1861-1865, Congress repeatedly used its appropriations powers to restrict the executive branch’s military initiatives. In the 1970s, Congress stopped the appropriation of funds to halt President Gerald Ford’s intervention into Angola’s civil war. Congress barred President Ronald Reagan’s military support for anti-Communist Contras in Nicaragua, and cut off President Bill Clinton’s 1994 intervention in Somalia. Two-thirds of all Americans, and over 80 percent of African Americans, want U.S. troops out of Iraq. Every day, the human costs continue to rise. Americans to date have suffered 26,000 killed and wounded soldiers, costing $500 billion that should have been invested in our schools, health care, transportation, and public housing. When U.S. bombs drop on Iraqi towns and cities, they also explode in East Los Angeles, Chicago’s South Side, and Harlem – because these billions of dollars aren’t being spent on human needs. Dr. King would demand that Congress must use its constitutional authority to halt all appropriations for the military presence of U.S. combat forces in Iraq now. In the spirit of Dr. King, we must half the madness of the Iraq War immediately.
Dr. Manning Marable is Professor of Public Affairs, History and African-American Studies, and Director of the Center for Contemporary Black History at Columbia University. “Along the Color Line” appears in over 400 publications internationally, and is available at http://www.manningmarable.net.
Beyond Vietnam to the madness of IraqApril 16, 2007On April 4, 1967, exactly one year to the day before his assassination, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. delivered his eloquent yet controversial address, “Beyond Vietnam,” at New York City’s Riverside Church. In his sermon, Dr. King announced his moral and political reasons for opposing the U.S. military escalation in Vietnam. “I come to this magnificent house of worship tonight,” King began, “because my conscience leaves me no other choice.” King noted that the presence of hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops in southeast Asia had only led to the deaths of thousands of innocent victims, and had cost American taxpayers billions of dollars. “A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death,” King observed. It was impossible for the administration of then-President Lyndon Johnson to carry out his “Great Society” social programs, or his “War on Poverty,” when billions of dollars were being reallocated to destroy Vietnamese villages, towns and homes. As journalist Bob Herbert recently noted, King’s “Beyond Vietnam” address “unleashed a hurricane of criticism.” Both the NAACP and black leaders such as Bayard Rustin sharply criticized King for “stepping out of his perceived area of expertise, civil rights, to raise his voice against the evil of the war.” The New York Times joined these critics, proclaiming in an editorial headline, “Dr. King’s Error.” On April 1 this year, hundreds gathered again at Riverside Church, to celebrate the fortieth anniversary of King’s “Beyond Vietnam” address, and to link his analysis to the current national debate over U.S. military involvement in Iraq. The event featured keynote addresses by the Reverend Dr. C. T. Vivian, a veteran civil rights leader; the Reverend Dr. Joseph E. Lowery, former leader of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference; and myself. Also speaking were Mrs. Kadiatou Diallo, the mother of the martyred victim of New York police brutality, Amadou Diallo; the current SCLC President, Charles Steele, Jr.; and the Reverend Dr. Thomas Stiers, Riverside Church’s interim Senior Minister. At one point in the Riverside Church program, scores of young people read sections of Dr. King’s “Beyond Vietnam” speech to the congregation. It was difficult to remember that Martin was talking about the tragedy of Vietnam, rather than the Iraq civil war today. King declared: “I speak for those whose land is being laid waste, whose homes are being destroyed, whose culture is being subverted … I speak as a citizen of the world, for the world as it stands aghast at the path we have taken. I speak as an American to the leaders of my own nation. The great initiative in this war is ours. The initiative to stop it must be ours.” For Martin, it was not too late for America to halt the madness of militarism and bloody destruction. “If we will make the right choice,” he affirmed, “we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our world into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood and sisterhood.” How would Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. respond to the current Iraq War? King would be deeply troubled by the recent opinion polls of Iraqis conducted in January 2007, that coincided with President Bush’s so-called “surge” of U.S. military forces. Over 70 percent of all Iraqis want Americans to leave their country within months, not years. More than 60 percent of Iraqis stated that they agreed with “the killing of U.S. troops.” President Bush insists that he alone, as Commander in Chief, is responsible for conducting war policy for the United States. King would rightly declare that Bush is ignorant of American history, and the powers of Congress as outlined in the U.S. Constitution. During both the Mexican-American War of 1846-1848, and the Civil War in 1861-1865, Congress repeatedly used its appropriations powers to restrict the executive branch’s military initiatives. In the 1970s, Congress stopped the appropriation of funds to halt President Gerald Ford’s intervention into Angola’s civil war. Congress barred President Ronald Reagan’s military support for anti-Communist Contras in Nicaragua, and cut off President Bill Clinton’s 1994 intervention in Somalia. Two-thirds of all Americans, and over 80 percent of African Americans, want U.S. troops out of Iraq. Every day, the human costs continue to rise. Americans to date have suffered 26,000 killed and wounded soldiers, costing $500 billion that should have been invested in our schools, health care, transportation, and public housing. When U.S. bombs drop on Iraqi towns and cities, they also explode in East Los Angeles, Chicago’s South Side, and Harlem – because these billions of dollars aren’t being spent on human needs. Dr. King would demand that Congress must use its constitutional authority to halt all appropriations for the military presence of U.S. combat forces in Iraq now. In the spirit of Dr. King, we must half the madness of the Iraq War immediately.
Dr. Manning Marable is Professor of Public Affairs, History and African-American Studies, and Director of the Center for Contemporary Black History at Columbia University. “Along the Color Line” appears in over 400 publications internationally, and is available at http://www.manningmarable.net.
Saturday, April 14, 2007
Thursday, April 12, 2007
Saturday, April 07, 2007
Imus apologizes for racial slur on ChicagoSports.com
Imus apologizes for racial slur on ChicagoSports.com
"Nappy headed hoes?"
That is beyond a slur. I bet he gets a raise for it.
He should lose his fcc licence.
"Nappy headed hoes?"
That is beyond a slur. I bet he gets a raise for it.
He should lose his fcc licence.
Friday, April 06, 2007
US has tried to topple Mugabe regime
Not surprising, considering Mugabe was once one of Pan-Africanism's brightest lights. I think he should begin paving the way for the future of PanAFricanism by not embracing authoritarianism.
Given the West's (THe US and Western Europe) history of plundering African wealth and and literally killing leaders who could have established a UNITED STATES OF AFRICA for AFRICANS, Mugabe is not entirely as crazy as the western media portrays him.
Given the West's (THe US and Western Europe) history of plundering African wealth and and literally killing leaders who could have established a UNITED STATES OF AFRICA for AFRICANS, Mugabe is not entirely as crazy as the western media portrays him.
Bush, Cheney Redeux? see also:
I pray that this is some kind of joke -- a very sad, sick and misplaced attempt at humor as twisted as the sneer on Darth Cheney's face.
From the always shady NYTImes, April 1:
Cheney/Bush May Challenge 22nd Amendment for THIRD Term
by Phillip Mckrack
April 1, 2007
NY TIMES
http://www.newyourketimes.com/content/article76649.html#secondParagraph
Mr. Cheney again cited the war in Iraq as a key component in the effort
to combat terrorism, saying "The war in Iraq is such a crucial part of
the greater war on terror that we currently have our legal advisors
looking into the possibility that the 22nd Amendment may not apply in 2008."
Because the speech was not publicized and was held on a secure military
base, very few journalists were present, and none were able to ask
questions about what the Vice President's comments might mean. Repeated
efforts to contact the Vice President's Office to clarify the comment
were unsuccessful.
The 22nd Amendment to the Constitution prohibits U.S. Presidents from
running for a third term, stating "No person shall be elected to the
office of the President more than twice...". The 22nd Amendment was
passed in 1951 after President Franklin Roosevelt broke a tradition that
dated back to George Washington, in which Presidents voluntarily refused
to run for a third term.
Political pundits and Constitutional experts are split on what the Vice
President's comments could mean. Some see the comments as an effort to
extend the Administration's "war powers" due to the fact that the
country is at war. They argue that there is a tenuous case to be made
that the 22nd Amendment doesn't apply during war time since the Congress
waited until after WW II to introduce such an Amendment. Others say that
the mere fact that the country had just ended the war in 1951, when the
Amendment was passed, suggests that the Congress would have put such an
exception into the language of the Amendment if they had intended it not
apply during times of war.
Others say that the Bush Administration will argue that the 2000 race
was not actually decided by an election and that the Bush administration
has technically only been "elected" once since the Supreme Court's
Decision in Bush v. Gore effectively nullified the popular vote.
Anonymous sources inside the White House have corraborated that this may
indeed be the Administration's plan.
Arguing that it was not actually elected would be a very interesting
approach for the administration to say the least, but most experts agree
that it is certainly possible given the Bush administration's history of
creative interpretation of the law with regard to such cases as:
# the assertion that The Geneva Conventions do not apply to U.S.
detainees captured on the battlefield,
# suggestions that the legal definition of "torture" only includes
activities that cause death or organ failure,
# the argument that U.S. Citizens do not have a right to "due process"
if declared "enemy combatants", which was recently rejected by the
Supreme Court,
# Attorney General Albert Gonzales's testimony before Congress that the
Constitution doesn't guarantee U.S. Citizens a right to Habeas Corpus,
# The Administration's claim that the FISA law does not apply to their
warrantless wire taps of Americans.
Critics of the Administration argue that these cases are all the proof
needed to believe that The Bush Administration would try to argue that
its own victory in 2000 demonstrates that it could run for a third term
in 2008.
From the always shady NYTImes, April 1:
Cheney/Bush May Challenge 22nd Amendment for THIRD Term
by Phillip Mckrack
April 1, 2007
NY TIMES
http://www.newyourketimes.com/content/article76649.html#secondParagraph
Mr. Cheney again cited the war in Iraq as a key component in the effort
to combat terrorism, saying "The war in Iraq is such a crucial part of
the greater war on terror that we currently have our legal advisors
looking into the possibility that the 22nd Amendment may not apply in 2008."
Because the speech was not publicized and was held on a secure military
base, very few journalists were present, and none were able to ask
questions about what the Vice President's comments might mean. Repeated
efforts to contact the Vice President's Office to clarify the comment
were unsuccessful.
The 22nd Amendment to the Constitution prohibits U.S. Presidents from
running for a third term, stating "No person shall be elected to the
office of the President more than twice...". The 22nd Amendment was
passed in 1951 after President Franklin Roosevelt broke a tradition that
dated back to George Washington, in which Presidents voluntarily refused
to run for a third term.
Political pundits and Constitutional experts are split on what the Vice
President's comments could mean. Some see the comments as an effort to
extend the Administration's "war powers" due to the fact that the
country is at war. They argue that there is a tenuous case to be made
that the 22nd Amendment doesn't apply during war time since the Congress
waited until after WW II to introduce such an Amendment. Others say that
the mere fact that the country had just ended the war in 1951, when the
Amendment was passed, suggests that the Congress would have put such an
exception into the language of the Amendment if they had intended it not
apply during times of war.
Others say that the Bush Administration will argue that the 2000 race
was not actually decided by an election and that the Bush administration
has technically only been "elected" once since the Supreme Court's
Decision in Bush v. Gore effectively nullified the popular vote.
Anonymous sources inside the White House have corraborated that this may
indeed be the Administration's plan.
Arguing that it was not actually elected would be a very interesting
approach for the administration to say the least, but most experts agree
that it is certainly possible given the Bush administration's history of
creative interpretation of the law with regard to such cases as:
# the assertion that The Geneva Conventions do not apply to U.S.
detainees captured on the battlefield,
# suggestions that the legal definition of "torture" only includes
activities that cause death or organ failure,
# the argument that U.S. Citizens do not have a right to "due process"
if declared "enemy combatants", which was recently rejected by the
Supreme Court,
# Attorney General Albert Gonzales's testimony before Congress that the
Constitution doesn't guarantee U.S. Citizens a right to Habeas Corpus,
# The Administration's claim that the FISA law does not apply to their
warrantless wire taps of Americans.
Critics of the Administration argue that these cases are all the proof
needed to believe that The Bush Administration would try to argue that
its own victory in 2000 demonstrates that it could run for a third term
in 2008.
Thursday, April 05, 2007
Reframing the immigration debate and uniting communities of color
The Minneapolis Urban League, The Council On Crime And Justice, The NAACP, African American Family Services, Jewish Community Action, Council on Black Minnesotans, African American Men’s Project, Micah-OPACC, American Immigration Lawyers Association, Chicano Latino Affairs Council, Communities United Against Police Brutality, Community Justice Partners, Sabathani Community Center, Women Planting Seeds, Organizing Apprenticeship Project and the Barbara Schneider Foundation present:
* Outline new strategies to combat racial profiling!
* Discuss current immigration policies & plans for change!
* Promote shared interests in racial justice!
April 5, 2007
6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. (really tasty supper @ 5:30 PM)
Minneapolis Urban League
2100 Plymouth Avenue North, Minneapolis
612-302-3100
This will be an incredible Minnesota Pipeline Experience! Please plan to attend. Bring everyone you know who wants to work on uniting our communities.
RACIAL PROFILING & IMMIGRATION IN MINNESOTA:
Reframing the Immigration Debate & Uniting Communities of Color!
Join community activists & neighbors from across the state as they:Reframing the Immigration Debate & Uniting Communities of Color!
* Outline new strategies to combat racial profiling!
* Discuss current immigration policies & plans for change!
* Promote shared interests in racial justice!
April 5, 2007
6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. (really tasty supper @ 5:30 PM)
Minneapolis Urban League
2100 Plymouth Avenue North, Minneapolis
612-302-3100
This will be an incredible Minnesota Pipeline Experience! Please plan to attend. Bring everyone you know who wants to work on uniting our communities.
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
Mumia Update
Oral arguments for Mumia Abu-Jamal begin May 17.
Like JM says, the mainstream continues to portray Mumia as a cold-blooded killler by omitting any evidence that may debunk that theory. Only the independents and guerrillas have had the cajones to do the real research.
Like JM says, the mainstream continues to portray Mumia as a cold-blooded killler by omitting any evidence that may debunk that theory. Only the independents and guerrillas have had the cajones to do the real research.
I, Plaintiff: Blatantly unconstitutional 'false reporting' law passed MN legislature
by Rashard Zanders
It's true. Since 2005 MN statute 609.505 has been amended to criminalize "false" complaints of police brutality and misconduct.
What is the motivation behind this statute? Essentially, it is to intimidate people and the press from reporting police misconduct and brutality statewide. Communities United Against Police Brutality (CUAPB), the Pulse's Lydia Howell, and myself have been joined by others as plaintiffs against this latest round of idiocy. Stay tuned for more.
The Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota describes 609.505 as follows:
Subdivision 1. False reporting. Whoever informs a law enforcement officer that a crime has
been committed or otherwise provides information to an on-duty peace officer, knowing that the
person is a peace officer, regarding the conduct of others, knowing that it is false and intending
that the officer shall act in reliance upon it, is guilty of a misdemeanor. A person who is convicted
a second or subsequent time under this section is guilty of a gross misdemeanor.
Subd. 2. Reporting police misconduct. (a) Whoever informs, or causes information to
be communicated to, a peace officer, whose responsibilities include investigating or reporting
police misconduct, that a peace officer, as defined in section 626.84, subdivision 1, paragraph
(c), has committed an act of police misconduct, knowing that the information is false, is guilty
of a crime and may be sentenced as follows:
(1) up to the maximum provided for a misdemeanor if the false information does not allege a
criminal act; or
(2) up to the maximum provided for a gross misdemeanor if the false information alleges
a criminal act.
(b) The court shall order any person convicted of a violation of this subdivision to make
full restitution of all reasonable expenses incurred in the investigation of the false allegation
unless the court makes a specific written finding that restitution would be inappropriate under
the circumstances. A restitution award may not exceed $3,000.
History: 1963 c 753 art 1 s 609.505; 1971 c 23 s 52; 1993 c 326 art 4 s 26; 2005 c 136
art 17 s 30
Follow the link below if you would like to sign the petition for overturning MN statute 609.505.
http://www.petitiononline.com/cuapb02/petition.html.
See also:
http://www.law.uconn.edu/journals/cpilj/contents/archives/vol4/gee.pdf.
Apologies for several tech flubs. I tried to make the web address directly above a link, but blogger is screwy this morning and linked the later to the former....go figure.
Thanks Blogger.
I am open to suggestions if anyone can refer me to a new blogging site where I can write, then instantly post to my blog.
Hit me up at:
rashard.zanders@gmail.com
It's true. Since 2005 MN statute 609.505 has been amended to criminalize "false" complaints of police brutality and misconduct.
What is the motivation behind this statute? Essentially, it is to intimidate people and the press from reporting police misconduct and brutality statewide. Communities United Against Police Brutality (CUAPB), the Pulse's Lydia Howell, and myself have been joined by others as plaintiffs against this latest round of idiocy. Stay tuned for more.
The Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota describes 609.505 as follows:
609.505 FALSELY REPORTING CRIME.
Subdivision 1. False reporting. Whoever informs a law enforcement officer that a crime has
been committed or otherwise provides information to an on-duty peace officer, knowing that the
person is a peace officer, regarding the conduct of others, knowing that it is false and intending
that the officer shall act in reliance upon it, is guilty of a misdemeanor. A person who is convicted
a second or subsequent time under this section is guilty of a gross misdemeanor.
Subd. 2. Reporting police misconduct. (a) Whoever informs, or causes information to
be communicated to, a peace officer, whose responsibilities include investigating or reporting
police misconduct, that a peace officer, as defined in section 626.84, subdivision 1, paragraph
(c), has committed an act of police misconduct, knowing that the information is false, is guilty
of a crime and may be sentenced as follows:
(1) up to the maximum provided for a misdemeanor if the false information does not allege a
criminal act; or
(2) up to the maximum provided for a gross misdemeanor if the false information alleges
a criminal act.
(b) The court shall order any person convicted of a violation of this subdivision to make
full restitution of all reasonable expenses incurred in the investigation of the false allegation
unless the court makes a specific written finding that restitution would be inappropriate under
the circumstances. A restitution award may not exceed $3,000.
History: 1963 c 753 art 1 s 609.505; 1971 c 23 s 52; 1993 c 326 art 4 s 26; 2005 c 136
art 17 s 30
Follow the link below if you would like to sign the petition for overturning MN statute 609.505.
http://www.petitiononline.com/cuapb02/petition.html.
See also:
http://www.law.uconn.edu/journals/cpilj/contents/archives/vol4/gee.pdf.
Apologies for several tech flubs. I tried to make the web address directly above a link, but blogger is screwy this morning and linked the later to the former....go figure.
Thanks Blogger.
I am open to suggestions if anyone can refer me to a new blogging site where I can write, then instantly post to my blog.
Hit me up at:
rashard.zanders@gmail.com
Monday, April 02, 2007
Sunday, April 01, 2007
MPR: Minn. Senate votes to raise income taxes on highest-paid
Silly senate! Don't they know taxes are for sports stadiums for billionaires.
How about a statewide tax for education similar to the one Hennepin County has to pay (3 cents on every $20 spent) for Carl Pohlad's baseball team. Surely education is as worthy a cause as baseball...
Isn't it?
Hello? Hello?
How about a statewide tax for education similar to the one Hennepin County has to pay (3 cents on every $20 spent) for Carl Pohlad's baseball team. Surely education is as worthy a cause as baseball...
Isn't it?
Hello? Hello?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
