Time for truth and reality to be reborn. Like Sam Cooke said "a change 'gone come", and it's time to bring into being a change for the better.
Exodus Mentality is a progressive Journey to Freedom, a forum for addressing business and community issues, and a hope for a global economic development plan to eliminate poverty and promote world peace.
So wrong, in fact, that I wonder what would make a former editor of the Harvard Law Review say something so entirely specious and idiotic.
I wonder if the young Somail pirate who is being brought to the U.S. to stand trial could use the president's statement to get out of his impending life sentence?
I wonder if one of my cousins (or yours) could use that statement to get off some of that jail time they are facing?
No I don't. I already know that Somali boy and all my ocusins (and yours) are so outta luck it ain't funny.
justice... get real. the word doesn't even deserve to be capitalized.
"This is a time for reflection, not retribution... nothing will be gained by spending our time and energy laying blame for the past."
Isn't "laying blame for the past" exactly what our justice system was designed to do? Isn't that the basis of every criminal case in every criminal court in the nation?
The idea that criminal acts must, indeed should, go unpunished, if--and only if--they are committed by the ruling class or government officials, is at the heart of what's wrong with our republic. It is as appallingly true with respect to the looting of the economy as it is with respect to the war crimes these memos disclose. (Note to NPR: if Sylvia Poggioli were kidnapped off the streets of Rome, put in a coffin-sized container, deprived of sleep for eleven consecutive nights, had her head slammed against a wall, were made to feel as if she were drowning, would you say that she had been subjected to "harsh interrogation techniques"? Or might you use the word torture?)
These are the people brother President is protecting from criminal prosecution. I love me some Rachel Maddow. She is even better than Olberman and Stewart for telling it like it is.
It seems to me that the only question that really needs to be asked is this. If someone subjected you or a family member to this type of treatment, would you consider it torture? If not, then somebody should immediately do so, IMHO.
The Georgia State Senate has decided that Georgia can and will leave the United States of America. No actual date of secession has been set, but on April 1, 2009, Senate Resolution 362 was passed, which clearly states that the representatives of the people of the great State (soon to be nation) of Georgia can and will remove themselves from the United States for any number of vaguely specified rationales. This stuff is so bizarre you have to read the whole thing for yourself down below.
I know, you think I'm joking. This is 2009 after all; the seat of government in GA is smack dab in the middle of the most thriving Chocolate City in the country. No way Black folks going for this and there are plenty of Black folks in and around GA government, right?
Does anyone here recall the Russian historian who predicted that the U.S. was headed for some type of Balkanization, or breakup of the union? Here's just one article about it from the Wall Street Journal. He made the prediction 10 years ago, but it just got attention here in November of 2008. I recall that he was roundly ridiculed. If you read what he said back then, it's almost like the man can really see the future. I bet he's sitting back with a big "I told you so" grin on his face right now.
This insane resolution by your state representatives really passed 43-1. I had to look it up. Thankfully, my state senator, a young brother from Lithonia, was the lone voice of reason in the room. I wonder what it took to convince the other black senators that secession was once again a good idea? That's another good reason not to laugh this off too easily.
Mark my words, there is something to this. I don't know what yet, but there are a lot of people out there who will push to get a country of haves, and leave the have-nots to "fend for themselves". Black reparations groups have seriously floated the idea of a separate state. What makes you think rich white folks haven't thought of it, and are much better positioned to make it a reality on their terms, if they can just figure out a way to get Joe the Plumber and his ignorant blue collar cohorts to go along with the idea? Of what persuasion would you figure most of the have-nots in this scenario to be?
Approaching this as if it could never happen, as if it's just a few crackpot crackers blowing off a little steam, is the absolute worst position any sensible Black person should take. I'm from Georgia's old school and I remember how life threatening a few crackpot crackers blowing off some steam can be.
And for my brothers and sisters of the melanin challenged persuasion, don't be fooled into thinking that this secession stuff will benefit you in any way. The history of secession in this country is marinated in the blood of poor people, poor white people, who were used as cannon fodder in a misguided attempt to protect the ill gotten privilege of a few.
UPDATE: This thing is burning my bubble so badly that I had to dash off a quick letter of thanks to GA State Senator Ronald Ramsey Sr., a man I'm proud to say I voted for (at least today). Here's the letter. I'm also going to post the Senate vote below the resolution so you will have no trouble determining who is part of this nonsense.
Greetings Senator,
I recently became aware of the creation and passage of Senate Resolution 362, reading of it in the Jack and Jill Politics blog, and the Jay Bookman editorial in the AJC.
Sir, let me first say that as a past constituent of yours, one who voted for you in 2006, I offer you my heartfelt thanks for representing me in a courageous and rational manner in voting no to this resolution.I am not prone to communicating with my elected representatives, as most rarely do anything I might consider worthy of accolade, and most never respond in any fashion to criticism.It may have seemed a small thing to you at the time, but this may well be a defining moment in your term. You are now the only member of the Georgia State Senate who can make any claim to sanity and coherence of thought, much less a claim to represent the people of Georgia.
On this issue, I intend to write a scathing commentary naming each and every Democrat, and especially the African American members, who were so deficient in the performance of their duties as to register a yes vote to this ludicrous, yet extremely dangerous bit of political theater.As a lawyer and former judge I am sure you recognize what a tortured reading and interpretation of the Constitution is being proposed here.The sponsors of the bill, primarily non-lawyers, obviously care little for how much they have to twist words and meaning, so long as they arrive at the desired conclusion.But this reads as nothing short of a complete denunciation of the federal government under President Barack Obama.It purports to render the federal government as ineffectual and powerless as it was during the days of the Articles of Confederation.It is ridiculous on its face.And yet, it is being and will be taken seriously and discussed seriously all over this country.
Some may consider this a small or laughing matter.I see chatter of secession, states rights, and armed resistance to the government, mere weeks after the installation of the first ever African American to the office of POTUS.This message, at this time, despite the fact that this president has 60% approval ratings and the last one was closer to 30%? This is no mere coincidence.This conversation coming from the extremist far right is to be expected, but to receive what amounts to near unanimous approval from my state government places me in imminent fear for my safety.I have no doubt that many of those who are advocating a return to the old ways do not have my best interests at heart.
I believe you would be well served to make a substantial effort to notify the people you represent that this kind of activity is being carried out in their names.I recognize that you are a very junior member of the body, but as you’ve already shown you have the courage, you should implore your Democratic colleagues, and particularly those African American colleagues, who represent largely African-American constituencies, to publicly repudiate that ill-considered vote, and the xenophobic, supremacist sentiments that spawned that bizarre resolution.
As a matter of full disclosure to you, I will be publishing this letter to you on my blog, www.ExodusMentality.blogspot.com, which is not itself that well read, but is a member of an international bloggers association known as the Afrospear, that tends to generate a fair amount of readership.The blog post containing this letter is dedicated to my intense disapproval of those totally disconnected, and this point totally discredited, Senators who were foolish enough to support SR 362.
Dwight D. Hunter, J.D.
Senate Resolution 632
By: Senators Pearson of the 51st, Rogers of the 21st, Williams of the 19th, Wiles of the 37th, Mullis of the 53rd and others
ADOPTED SENATE
A RESOLUTION
Affirming states' rights based on Jeffersonian principles; and for other purposes.
WHEREAS, the Ninth Amendment of the United States Constitution states "[t]he enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people" and the Tenth Amendment states "[t]he powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SENATE that this body reaffirms the principles of government expressed by Thomas Jefferson in a resolution written for the Kentucky legislature in 1798 stating that the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a General Government for special purposes, -- delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force; that to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party: that the government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress; and
That the Constitution of the United States, having delegated to Congress a power to punish treason, counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States, piracies, and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences against the law of nations, slavery, and no other crimes whatsoever; and it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people," therefore all acts of Congress which assume to create, define, or punish crimes, other than those so enumerated in the Constitution are altogether void, and of no force; and that the power to create, define, and punish such other crimes is reserved, and, of right, appertains solely and exclusively to the respective States, each within its own territory; and
That it is true as a general principle, and is also expressly declared by one of the amendments to the Constitution, that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people;" and that no power over the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, or freedom of the press being delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, all lawful powers respecting the same did of right remain, and were reserved to the States or the people: that thus was manifested their determination to retain to themselves the right of judging how far the licentiousness of speech and of the press may be abridged without lessening their useful freedom, and how far those abuses which cannot be separated from their use should be tolerated, rather than the use be destroyed. And thus also they guarded against all abridgment by the United States of the freedom of religious opinions and exercises, and retained to themselves the right of protecting the same. And that in addition to this general principle and express declaration, another and more special provision has been made by one of the amendments to the Constitution, which expressly declares, that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press": thereby guarding in the same sentence, and under the same words, the freedom of religion, of speech, and of the press: insomuch, that whatever violated either, throws down the sanctuary which covers the others, and that libels, falsehood, and defamation, equally with heresy and false religion, are withheld from the cognizance of federal tribunals. That, therefore, all acts of Congress of the United States which do abridge the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, are not law, but are altogether void, and of no force; and
That the construction applied by the General Government (as is evidenced by sundry of their proceedings) to those parts of the Constitution of the United States which delegate to Congress a power "to lay and collect taxes, duties, imports, and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States," and "to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the powers vested by the Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof," goes to the destruction of all limits prescribed to their power by the Constitution: that words meant by the instrument to be subsidiary only to the execution of limited powers, ought not to be so construed as themselves to give unlimited powers, nor a part to be so taken as to destroy the whole residue of that instrument: that the proceedings of the General Government under color of these articles, will be a fit and necessary subject of revisal and correction; and
That a committee of conference and correspondence be appointed, which shall have as its charge to communicate the preceding resolutions to the Legislatures of the several States; to assure them that this State continues in the same esteem of their friendship and union which it has manifested from that moment at which a common danger first suggested a common union: that it considers union, for specified national purposes, and particularly to those specified in their federal compact, to be friendly to the peace, happiness and prosperity of all the States: that faithful to that compact, according to the plain intent and meaning in which it was understood and acceded to by the several parties, it is sincerely anxious for its preservation: that it does also believe, that to take from the States all the powers of self-government and transfer them to a general and consolidated government, without regard to the special delegations and reservations solemnly agreed to in that compact, is not for the peace, happiness or prosperity of these States; and that therefore this State is determined, as it doubts not its co-States are, to submit to undelegated, and consequently unlimited powers in no man, or body of men on earth: that in cases of an abuse of the delegated powers, the members of the General Government, being chosen by the people, a change by the people would be the constitutional remedy; but, where powers are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy: that every State has a natural right in cases not within the compact, (casus non foederis), to nullify of their own authority all assumptions of power by others within their limits: that without this right, they would be under the dominion, absolute and unlimited, of whosoever might exercise this right of judgment for them: that nevertheless, this State, from motives of regard and respect for its co-States, has wished to communicate with them on the subject: that with them alone it is proper to communicate, they alone being parties to the compact, and solely authorized to judge in the last resort of the powers exercised under it, Congress being not a party, but merely the creature of the compact, and subject as to its assumptions of power to the final judgment of those by whom, and for whose use itself and its powers were all created and modified: that if the acts before specified should stand, these conclusions would flow from them: that it would be a dangerous delusion were a confidence in the men of our choice to silence our fears for the safety of our rights: that confidence is everywhere the parent of despotism -- free government is founded in jealousy, and not in confidence; it is jealousy and not confidence which prescribes limited constitutions, to bind down those whom we are obliged to trust with power: that our Constitution has accordingly fixed the limits to which, and no further, our confidence may go. In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution. That this State does therefore call on its co-States for an expression of their sentiments on acts not authorized by the federal compact. And it doubts not that their sense will be so announced as to prove their attachment unaltered to limited government, whether general or particular. And that the rights and liberties of their co-States will be exposed to no dangers by remaining embarked in a common bottom with their own. That they will concur with this State in considering acts as so palpably against the Constitution as to amount to an undisguised declaration that that compact is not meant to be the measure of the powers of the General Government, but that it will proceed in the exercise over these States, of all powers whatsoever: that they will view this as seizing the rights of the States, and consolidating them in the hands of the General Government, with a power assumed to bind the States, not merely as the cases made federal, (casus foederis,) but in all cases whatsoever, by laws made, not with their consent, but by others against their consent: that this would be to surrender the form of government we have chosen, and live under one deriving its powers from its own will, and not from our authority; and that the co-States, recurring to their natural right in cases not made federal, will concur in declaring these acts void, and of no force, and will each take measures of its own for providing that neither these acts, nor any others of the General Government not plainly and intentionally authorized by the Constitution, shall be exercised within their respective territories; and
That the said committee be authorized to communicate by writing or personal conferences, at any times or places whatever, with any person or person who may be appointed by any one or more co-States to correspond or confer with them; and that they lay their proceedings before the next session of the General Court.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that any Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President of the United States of America or Judicial Order by the Judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not delegated to the government of the United States of America by the Constitution for the United States of America and which serves to diminish the liberty of the any of the several States or their citizens shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the United States of America by the government of the United States of America. Acts which would cause such a nullification include, but are not limited to:
I. Establishing martial law or a state of emergency within one of the States comprising the United States of America without the consent of the legislature of that State.
II. Requiring involuntary servitude, or governmental service other than a draft during a declared war, or pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.
III. Requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of persons under the age of 18 other than pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.
IV. Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government.
V. Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press.
VI. Further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition; and
That should any such act of Congress become law or Executive Order or Judicial Order be put into force, all powers previously delegated to the United States of America by the Constitution for the United States shall revert to the several States individually. Any future government of the United States of America shall require ratification of three quarters of the States seeking to form a government of the United States of America and shall not be binding upon any State not seeking to form such a government.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Secretary of the Senate is authorized and directed to transmit an appropriate copy of this resolution to the President of the United States, each member of the United States Congress.
In 1991, the government of Somalia collapsed. Its nine million people have been teetering on starvation ever since – and the ugliest forces in the Western world have seen this as a great opportunity to steal the country's food supply and dump our nuclear waste in their seas.
Yes: nuclear waste. As soon as the government was gone, mysterious European ships started appearing off the coast of Somalia, dumping vast barrels into the ocean. The coastal population began to sicken. At first they suffered strange rashes, nausea and malformed babies. Then, after the 2005 tsunami, hundreds of the dumped and leaking barrels washed up on shore. People began to suffer from radiation sickness, and more than 300 died.
Ahmedou Ould-Abdallah, the UN envoy to Somalia, tells me: "Somebody is dumping nuclear material here. There is also lead, and heavy metals such as cadmium and mercury – you name it." Much of it can be traced back to European hospitals and factories, who seem to be passing it on to the Italian mafia to "dispose" of cheaply. When I asked Mr Ould-Abdallah what European governments were doing about it, he said with a sigh: "Nothing. There has been no clean-up, no compensation, and no prevention."
At the same time, other European ships have been looting Somalia's seas of their greatest resource: seafood. We have destroyed our own fish stocks by overexploitation – and now we have moved on to theirs. More than $300m-worth of tuna, shrimp, and lobster are being stolen every year by illegal trawlers. The local fishermen are now starving. Mohammed Hussein, a fisherman in the town of Marka 100km south of Mogadishu, told Reuters: "If nothing is done, there soon won't be much fish left in our coastal waters."
This is the context in which the "pirates" have emerged. Somalian fishermen took speedboats to try to dissuade the dumpers and trawlers, or at least levy a "tax" on them. They call themselves the Volunteer Coastguard of Somalia – and ordinary Somalis agree. The independent Somalian news site WardheerNews found 70 per cent "strongly supported the piracy as a form of national defence".
No, this doesn't make hostage-taking justifiable, and yes, some are clearly just gangsters – especially those who have held up World Food Programme supplies. But in a telephone interview, one of the pirate leaders, Sugule Ali: "We don't consider ourselves sea bandits. We consider sea bandits [to be] those who illegally fish and dump in our seas." William Scott would understand.
Did we expect starving Somalians to stand passively on their beaches, paddling in our toxic waste, and watch us snatch their fish to eat in restaurants in London and Paris and Rome? We won't act on those crimes – the only sane solution to this problem – but when some of the fishermen responded by disrupting the transit-corridor for 20 per cent of the world's oil supply, we swiftly send in the gunboats.
Another Update: I had to go drop this load in the Field. The chatter on this subject actually made me sick to my stomach. Comment by Exodus Mentality on the Field Negro Blog most of you never gave even a little bit of a damn about Somalia or any place other than america. whether you know it or not you have been socialized (at best, indoctrinated at worst) to be unabashedly incurable zenophobes. so the pirate stuff was all fun and games until they go too close, and messed with america. now all of a sudden a few broke somalis are the epicenter of the american news cycle and the focal point for the practice exercise of power by Pres. Obama.
field, even the tenor of this post left me wondering why any sane rational person would want to think that all of this is really all about Obama getting to show off his presidential cojones. to prove that he has the biggest swagger stick. are we ever going to get past the point of thinking that might makes right? just because Obama can order a few summary executions, doesn't mean that he should. and he certainly should not do so even in part to prove his manhood to a bunch of neocon lunatics who would be more than happy if iraq, iran, and afghanistan (not to mention large pieces of africa) were converted into huge glass parking lots with the occasional oil well jutting up from the smooth landscape.
and please, let us glorify the precision and professionalism (not to mention the prescience) of those fine navy seals and the navy captain. if it's not exciting enough, let's make it more than what it was. did that fool actually say those shots were made from 100-200 yards away? more like 30-40 meters, from a relatively calm platform, in the prone position. it's not that hard, g.i. no.
it sickens me that supposedly rational people accept the most illogical explanations. why would a boatload of starving, dehydrated men, who consented to have their boat towed by the people with whom they are having an armed stand-off, all of a sudden decide to kill the only man standing between them and the certain deadly reprisal that must accompany any harm done to their hostage. his safety insured theirs. we already know those dudes are some bold mofo's. if they decided to go out in a blaze, why not open up on the ship? fuck shooting a hostage when i got a boat load of sailors ridin my ass.
nevertheless, the mind reading, future seeing naval captain who proclaimed that they were about to shoot the hostage, must surely have been correct. they teach that mind reading, future telling stuff at the naval academy. after all one of those pirates pointed a gun at the hostage. (although, hadn't they been pointing guns at him all along?) or does all that credit for knowing the hearts and minds of the hostage takers also go to Obama?
saner heads in this thread finally pointed out that this whole "piracy" situation is far more complicated than most of us had ever imagined. and at the root of the issue is...wait for it...european colonialism and the continued raping and pillaging of african assets and resources by the same people who have historically used the motherland as their personal piggy bank.
of course, field pointed out (in quite the house negro fashion i must say) that there were some black folks involved in the screwing over of the other black folks in somalia. isn't that always how it goes? haven't we heard that rationale used to defend everything from the institution of slavery to the execution of Malik El Hajj Shabazz? didn't some african chiefs sell black people to the whites as slaves, wasn't it black folks who gunned down Malcolm?
i was once hopeful that the son of an african, who is also a black man who grew up in any part of america, would be too sensitive to the underlying issues that permeated all the strife and problems of brown people around the world to ever react like this. but it seems that hope has died. Obama has demonstrated that he will continue the imperialist policies of using military force to impose the capitalist will of this country and it's european allies on brown and black people around the world.
One sees in the recent career of Summers--and not least, in his ascent to the position of economic adviser to President Obama--how subtle, consistent, and pervasive are the means by which an aristocracy perpetuates itself. How it doles out its rewards to maintain its power. How it buys the talents and shapes the careers it needs, so that even a general crisis brings only a second layer of bribed servants, and the medicine is administered by doctors whose judgment is bought and paid for. One sees, too, what drove the rage against such a class in earlier times--the feeling that its power is a monstrous imposition; the fear that no cry or protest will ever penetrate from outside the closed circle.
ASK A REAL BLACK MAN is the latest public service from the Exodus Mentality. So the Exodus Mentality will humbly offer to clear up any and all confusion about any and all things pertaining to Black people. That's right, no question is too off the wall, no topic is too sensitive, no holds barred. If you ever had a question about anything relating to, about, or concerning Black people, we want to be your authoritative one stop shop for all the answers you need. Email your question to exodus@exodustax.com or ask your question in a comment to any post.
