The inane spec­ta­cle known as black Friday is now over for this year. The ginned up spec­ta­cle of big sav­ings to con­sumers seem slow­ly to be dawn­ing on peo­ple as a just anoth­er scam by big business.
CNBC reports that the large stores were pret­ty full but with most­ly young peo­ple who seemed more curi­ous than they were shopping.

“I don’t think this is the tar­get shop­per that every­body’s look­ing for today,” said Deloitte’s Kate Ferrara, who arrived at South Shore Plaza in Braintree, Massachusetts, at 6 a.m .“People were shop­ping, but over­all, it was pret­ty calm”. Steve Barr, with Price-water­house Coopers, said ear­ly indi­ca­tions are that in-store sales will be flat, with the big win­ners being online stores and shop­pers. He ques­tioned how stores that are offer­ing 50 to 70 per­cent off this ear­ly in the sea­son will be able to sur­vive long term. “My con­cern would be for the long-term ben­e­fit of the retail­ers this just has­n’t been the hol­i­day shop­ping week­end that they were hop­ing for,” he said.

In the inter­est of fair­ness I must con­fess that I am the oper­a­tor of a small busi­ness which makes the big box stores my sworn enemy.
In an effort to cre­ate a lev­el of par­i­ty cham­bers of com­merce across the coun­try have cre­at­ed small busi­ness Saturday as a way to get peo­ple to shop small­er main street busi­ness­es which have been the life-blood of America for hun­dreds of years.
Unfortunately for most small busi­ness oper­a­tors like myself who appre­ci­ate the ges­ture it’s gen­er­al­ly too lit­tle too late . By Saturday morn­ing all of the mon­ey is already spent. Unfortunately for cities and com­mu­ni­ties small busi­ness-own­ers are unable to hire peo­ple because even though black Friday sales seemed flat shop­pers are not flock­ing back to small stores, they are spend huge sums online.

Technically this reduces gross receipts to an even small­er group of real­ly wealthy peo­ple as the pro­ceeds are chan­neled to only a select group of peo­ple and cre­ates returns night­mares for online shoppers.
Whether this is a com­ing to it’s sens­es by the shop­ping pub­lic is yet to be seen .
I per­son­al­ly doubt it but remain hopeful .
Even if small busi­ness peo­ple like myself do not reap any mean­ing­ful rewards from peo­ple com­ing to their sens­es it brings me some com­fort if peo­ple stop mak­ing spec­ta­cles of them­selves while the very rich fat­ten their wallets.

YOU ARE A BLACK PERSON LIVING IN AMERICA.…

You believe the Police are there to pro­tect you. You believe Prosecutors will pros­e­cu­tor offenderS regard­less of who they are. You believe also that Judges are tru­ly inde­pen­dent tri­er of facts who will not allow affil­i­a­tions to col­or the way they dis­pense justice.
Here’s the skin­ny you are a fool.
Obviously four hun­dred years of rabid racism has taught you noth­ing if you chose not to wake up you are guar­an­teed anoth­er four hun­dred which will be worse that the pre­vi­ous if you can pic­ture that.

CITY OF CHICAGO FIRES INVESTIGATOR BECAUSE HE REFUSES TO FALSIFY POLICE BRUTALITY COMPLAINTS TO ABSOLVE COPS OF GUILT.

The city of Chicago fired an inves­ti­ga­tor because he refused to fal­si­fy police bru­tal­i­ty com­plaints to make offi­cers appear inno­cent of any wrong­do­ing, fur­ther rais­ing sus­pi­cions that the Chicago Police Department (CPD) is a cor­rupt police force. Investigator and for­mer police com­man­der Lorenzo Davis, 65, was released from the Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA) after refus­ing to alter case find­ings indi­cat­ing sev­er­al instances of unjus­ti­fied use of police force. The IPRA announced Davis’ ter­mi­na­tion on July 9, and accused him of hav­ing “a clear bias against the police.” The IPRA also said that Davis was “the only super­vi­sor at IPRA who resists mak­ing request­ed changes as direct­ed by man­age­ment in order to reflect the cor­rect find­ing with respect to OIS.” Considering the CPD’s past of heinous cor­rup­tion, it’s rea­son­able to believe that Davis was oust­ed because he didn’t cov­er up the behav­ior of dirty cops. The Chicago PD has earned a noto­ri­ous rep­u­ta­tion for cor­rup­tion and racism that has exist­ed for decades. Even the high­est-rank­ing police offi­cials in Chicago are sus­pect­ed of being cor­rupt. “I did not like the direc­tion the police depart­ment had tak­en,” said Davis. “It appeared that offi­cers were doing what­ev­er they want­ed to do.” Listen to WBEZ’s report.

Most if not all American Police Departments are actu­al laws onto them­selves . I don’t mean they are inde­pen­dent of Political manip­u­la­tion , I mean that they oper­ate with impuni­ty in most cas­es con­trary to the rule of law with­out fear of consequence.
To many Black cit­i­zens the police are mere thugs in uni­form with the legit­i­ma­cy of the law to back them.
Former Commander Lorenzo Davis refers to many with­in the Chicago Police Department as “race sol­diers”, he should know. However what exist in Chicago exist in Missouri, In Texas, In new Mexico, In Florida , In New York and every nook and cran­ny of the United States.

JUDGE LET COP WALK AFTER DEADLY SHOOTING .LEGAL EXPERTS SAY REASONING IS INCREDIBLE.
A Cook County judge acquit­ted Chicago police offi­cer Dante Servin of sev­er­al homi­cide-relat­ed charges for the fatal shoot­ing of an unarmed woman stand­ing out­side with some friends near his home. It was the first time in 15 years that a police offi­cer had been charged in Chicago for a fatal shoot­ing. And the court­room atten­dees explod­ed in out­rage as Judge Dennis Porter announced Servin was not guilty on all charges for killing 22-year-old Rekia Boyd. But Porter’s rul­ing was par­tic­u­lar­ly con­found­ing because of bizarre rea­son­ing that some legal experts are call­ing “incred­i­ble.” In an opin­ion that lament­ed Servin was nev­er charged with the more severe crimes of first- and sec­ond-degree mur­der, Porter sug­gest­ed he was acquit­ting Servin and send­ing him home with­out any pun­ish­ment because the invol­un­tary manslaugh­ter charge against him was actu­al­ly not severe enough. Servin was off duty when he fired the shots. He encoun­tered a group gath­ered in an alley while dri­ving through in his Mercedes sedan. As he drove the wrong way down the alley after an alter­ca­tion, he said he thought he saw one of the men reach for a gun and fired sev­er­al shots over his shoul­der at indi­vid­u­als who had their backs to Servin. Servin hit 22-year-old Rekia Boyd in the back of the head, killing her. “He was con­stant­ly shoot­ing,” Icka Beamon tes­ti­fied, who was in the alley that night and ran for cov­er. “He was try­ing to kill all of us.” Porter, the Cook County judge pre­sid­ing over the case, agreed that Servin was act­ing inten­tion­al­ly when he fired his gun. In fact, he said in his rul­ing, Illinois courts have long held that when a defen­dant “intends to fire a gun, points it in the gen­er­al direc­tion of his or her intend­ed vic­tim, and shoots, such con­duct is not mere­ly reck­less,” but “inten­tion­al” and “the crime, if any there be, is first degree murder.”

In a bizarre turn of rea­son­ing, Porter sug­gests that since the first-degree mur­der charge is not on the table, and the crimes with which he was charged — invol­un­tary manslaugh­ter and reck­less dis­charge of a gun — require that Servin was reck­less, Servin can­not be con­vict­ed of any crime at all. Lamenting that both sides might “ben­e­fit from some clo­sure on this ques­tion,” he nonethe­less con­cludes that the law com­pels him to acquit Servin of all charges. Porter’s rea­son­ing doesn’t clear­ly square with sev­er­al fun­da­men­tal prin­ci­ples of crim­i­nal law, accord­ing to legal experts. The con­cepts of “reck­less­ness” and “intent” are crim­i­nal law con­cepts that describe what is an ele­ment of almost every crim­i­nal offense — state of mind. In homi­cide cas­es, for exam­ple, state of mind (known as mens rea) is direct­ly cor­re­lat­ed to the sever­i­ty of the crime — offens­es that require mere “reck­less­ness,” or “con­scious­ly disregard[ing] a sub­stan­tial and unjus­ti­fi­able risk” — typ­i­cal­ly car­ries a low­er pun­ish­ment than mur­der crimes, which require the pros­e­cu­tor to prove intent, because inten­tion­al acts assume a high­er lev­el of malice.

Porter asserts that a defen­dant who does some­thing inten­tion­al­ly could not have also been reck­less, and thus should not be con­vict­ed of any­thing at all. But this dis­tinc­tion between reck­less­ness and intent “real­ly doesn’t make any sense at all,” University of Illinois law pro­fes­sor Marareth Etienne told ThinkProgress. At least under the nation­al crim­i­nal law stan­dard known as the Model Penal Code that all first-year law stu­dents are taught in Criminal Law 101, a high­er state of mind such as intent “always proves a low­er lev­el,” in this case, reck­less­ness. Recklessness “just means that you were aware of a risk and you didn’t take the prop­er pre­cau­tion. So clear­ly if you shoot at some­body and you shot in a crowd you’re aware of a risk that they’re gonna die,” Etienne said. “This is incred­i­ble!” University of Illinois Director of Trial Advocacy J. Steven Beckett said. “It appears to me that a less­er includ­ed offense was ignored because the proof of the greater offense was obvi­ous. This put pros­e­cu­to­r­i­al deci­sion-mak­ing under scruti­ny beyond any­thing imag­in­able.” In oth­er words, the pros­e­cu­tors were pun­ished for not hav­ing charged Servin with a more severe crime. Even more remark­able, Porter came to this deci­sion in what is known as a “direct­ed ver­dict” before he even heard the defense’s arguments.

“When a motion for direct­ed ver­dict is made by the defense, the evi­dence must be con­sid­ered in the light most favor­able to the pros­e­cu­tion,” Beckett points out. “What the judge did here appears to be just the oppo­site!” Etienne points out sev­er­al adverse con­se­quences that would result if Porter’s under­stand­ing of the law pre­vailed. A defen­dant charged with invol­un­tary manslaugh­ter could get on the stand and make the very argu­ment Porter now makes: I am not guilty of a crime of reck­less­ness because I did this on pur­pose. “And by the way my tri­al has start­ed so dou­ble jeop­ardy. You can’t go back and charge me with an inten­tion­al killing.” Double jeop­ardy is the con­sti­tu­tion­al notion that an indi­vid­ual can’t be charged twice for the same offense, and legal experts seemed to agree that dou­ble jeop­ardy means Porter’s rul­ing can’t be appealed, and that pros­e­cu­tors from the same juris­dic­tion can’t file charges a sec­ond time around. The oth­er adverse con­se­quence is that most of the plea deals pros­e­cu­tors now make with defen­dants wouldn’t make much sense: A defen­dant is charged with first-degree mur­der, for exam­ple, but pleads guilty to the less­er offense of invol­un­tary manslaugh­ter. “And that’s done all the time,” said Etienne. Porter does cite sev­er­al Illinois cas­es for his con­clu­sion. These cas­es pri­mar­i­ly deal with the issue of jury instruc­tions in the reverse sit­u­a­tion when some­one charged with a more severe intent crime wants a jury to con­sid­er a less­er offense. A mur­der defen­dant, for exam­ple, wants the judge to also instruct the jury that they can find the defen­dant guilty of the less­er crime of invol­un­tary manslaugh­ter rather than mur­der. The judge rejects the defendant’s argu­ment, on the ratio­nale that this is a crime of intent, and not a less­er crime of reck­less­ness. But Etienne points out that this is a very dif­fer­ent legal argu­ment. “To dis­miss a case where reck­less­ness was charged because intent was proven. That’s a dif­fer­ent ques­tion,” she said, while con­ced­ing the pos­si­bil­i­ty that Illinois courts would come out a dif­fer­ent way on this question.

Timothy P. O’Neill, a pro­fes­sor at John Marshall Law School in Chicago, ques­tions Porter for anoth­er, dif­fer­ent rea­son. “I respect Judge Porter, but at the same time I think he maybe made the case a lit­tle bit more dif­fi­cult than it had to be,” O’Neill said. Even if Servin intend­ed to fire the gun, he seem­ing­ly didn’t intend to hit Boyd. He instead intend­ed to hit the man whom he believed was pulling a gun out of his waist­band. “You can do inten­tion­al acts and still be found guilty of invol­un­tary manslaugh­ter based on results,” O’Neill said. Both O’Neill and Etienne agreed that Servin could have, and per­haps should have, been charged this time around with mur­der — a crime that requires intent. “But that does NOT mean that it is legal­ly impos­si­ble to also find it could have been invol­un­tary manslaugh­ter: the defen­dant com­mit­ted vol­un­tary acts that reck­less­ly killed an unin­tend­ed vic­tim,” O’Neill said. “That is invol­un­tary manslaugh­ter.” http://​thinkprogress​.org/​j​u​s​t​i​c​e​/​2​0​1​5​/​0​4​/​2​1​/​3​6​4​9​0​4​3​/​j​u​d​g​e​-​l​e​t​s​-​c​o​p​-​w​a​l​k​-​d​e​a​d​l​y​-​s​h​o​o​t​i​n​g​-​t​h​o​u​g​h​t​-​c​h​a​r​g​e​s​-​w​e​r​e​n​t​-​s​e​v​e​r​e​-​e​n​o​u​gh/

It’s impor­tant to note that the lat­est case of egre­gious police mis­con­duct hap­pened in Illinois the State the President calls home. And in Chicago a city run by the President’s for­mer Chief of staff Rahm Emanuel a Democrat.
The killing of trou­bled 17 year old Laquan McDonald by City of Chicago Cop Jason Van Dyke result­ed in a mas­sive cov­er-up involv­ing the Mayor the Prosecutor’s office and the Police who went as far as to crim­i­nal­ly delete crit­i­cal footage from a busi­ness place which cap­tured the exe­cu­tion of the 17 year old teen by Van Dyke.
Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez said Van Dyke had been on site less than 30 sec­onds and out of his car for six sec­onds, when he start­ed shooting.
However despite this clear knowl­edge that Jason VanDyke who had in excess of 20 com­plaints against him for abus­ing cit­i­zens had exe­cut­ed Laquan McDonald no crim­i­nal charges were brought by the Prosecutor ,

The mur­der­ous cop was still allowed to con­tin­ue oper­at­ing as a police offi­cer. Despite clear abu­sive and vio­lent ten­den­cies Van Dyke was allowed to con­tin­ue being a cop. Even after the city set­tled with at lest one mem­ber of the com­mu­ni­ty he caused seri­ous injury to. The city of Chicago pro­posed and reached a $5 mil­lion set­tle­ment in April to the moth­er of Laquan McDonald even though she did not even file a law­suit against the city for the mur­der of her son.
The Mayor , the Prosecutor and the Police brass knew it was a hor­ren­dous mur­der yet they fought tooth and nail to cov­er up the atro­cious behav­ior of a man whom they all knew sum­mar­i­ly exe­cut­ed anoth­er human being. The city’s man­ager’s were equal­ly as duplic­i­tous in approv­ing a 5 mil­lion dol­lar sum of tax­pay­ers mon­ey so a mur­der­ing punk could remain in uniform.
As a for­mer police offi­cer I am offend­ed when I see media hous­es like CNN bring on cops to tell view­ers why it’s nec­es­sary to fire 16 bul­lets into anoth­er human being who is armed with a small pen knife when the first shot spun him around and he fell pos­ing no dan­ger to any­one( not that he did before the shots).

A police offi­cer’s job is not to kill peo­ple, their job is to pro­tect and serve.
Members of the pub­lic are not ene­my com­bat­ants cops do not need to keep fir­ing until a per­son shows no sign of life.
CNN and oth­er cor­po­rate medi­um of mis­in­for­ma­tion are asym­met­ri­cal­ly wag­ing a war against black com­mu­ni­ty as well bring­ing cops, retired cops and cop-apol­o­gists on to con­vince a gullible pub­lic that cops need to treat civil­ians as com­bat­ants on a battlefield.
Even wars have rules of engage­ment, trag­i­cal­ly for the Black Community in America police do not seem to need to observe any rules of engagement
Jason VanDyke opened fire on Laquan McDonald imme­di­ate­ly after arriv­ing on by all accounts includ­ing the damming video of the incident.
He fired and kept fir­ing until the prostate vic­tim stopped twitch­ing . .….….…Sixteen shots in all it was a pub­lic execution.
None of the oth­er offi­cers fired a sin­gle shot. The crim­i­nal defense lawyer for Van Dyke lied that his client feared for his life the video shows oth­er­wise. An offi­cer afraid for his life does not advance on the per­son you are afraid of as Van Dyke did in the video.
The Prosecutor did not charge the killer cop with cap­i­tal mur­der until after a judge forced them to release the video.
The cov­er-up is mind bog­gling in this case the entire sys­tem in Chicago was pre­pared to cov­er up this heinous execution.
But no per­son of col­or should be sur­prised at this , it has been hap­pen­ing for hun­dreds of years and indeed cer­tain­ly before the advent of mobile cam­eras and video devices.

This killing is just anoth­er in a long line of police killing of peo­ple with­out jus­ti­fi­ca­tion. It is eeri­ly rem­i­nis­cent of the killing of 12 year-old Tamir Rice in Cleveland.
It smacks of a cal­lous, bla­tant, con­temp­tu­ous ‚dis­re­spect­ful dis­re­gard for human life. Those who argue that Blacks are killing Blacks shows a seri­ous lack of com­mon sense . It is the job of the police to bring black mur­der­ers to jus­tice they are paid to do so. The pris­ons are filled with black gang-bangers. What does that have to do with police murder?
We do not pay police to com­mit mur­der . Rahm Emanuel spoke of the impor­tance for peace after the video was released, yet Emanuel is dis­mis­sive of the Black Lives Matter Movement , declar­ing last month,” this move­ment has made a hard job even hard­er for law enforce­ment It is hav­ing an impact on the safe­ty we want to see through­out the city of Chicago,” .
Nothing like legit­imiz­ing these pow­er crazed big­ots they turn on you in a jiffy. This from a guy who Chicago Black res­i­dents turned out in droves and elect­ed to office.

What author­i­ty did Chicago police have to enter the burg­er King and erase damn­ing evi­dence from a secu­ri­ty camera?
Now that we know the offi­cers lied about the sequence of events what action will be tak­en against them?
What action will be tak­en against those who delet­ed the video of the exe­cu­tion from the sys­tem of a pri­vate company?
Will the Police Union now come out and apol­o­gize for lying that Laquan McDonald lunged at Van Dyke?

None of this will hap­pen because we live in a police state where the laws are stretched and recon­fig­ured to accom­mo­date police killings.
No one knows exact­ly how many peo­ple police kill in America each year. In light of recent hap­pen­ings some orga­ni­za­tions have begun look­ing seri­ous­ly at just how many peo­ple American police are exe­cut­ing in their name on an annu­al basis.
There are no uni­formed stan­dards of report­ing cop killings, none is required . It was always left up to cops to decide when to kill peo­ple and they do not even have to report it to fed­er­al authorities
Video Vigilantism is now slight­ly begin­ning to scratch the sur­face of this grotesque under­bel­ly of police atroc­i­ties and it reveals some­thing many would like to pre­tend is not happening.

Unfortunately some see it as nec­es­sary to con­trol and even exter­mi­nate Blacks from the equa­tion. This is a dou­ble edged sword how­ev­er as police are killing whites as well with alarm­ing alacrity and frequency.
Maybe just not with such depraved indif­fer­ence but soon col­or won’t matter.
Batons,pepper-spray and tasers are mere­ly used as instru­ments of tor­ture for American cops once a sus­pect is peace­able in hand­cuffs not tools to sub­due vio­lent suspects.
In oth­er coun­tries includ­ing Britain police are able to encir­cle sus­pects who are armed with machetes and swords with­out fir­ing a sin­gle shot. Generally when a sus­pect is in pub­lic act­ing strange armed with swords, machetes or small fold­ing knives[sic] there is usu­al­ly some­thing more going on as was the case of Laquan McDonald. The rul­ing is that he had PCP in his sys­tem whether this is true or not we may nev­er know. Who knows what to believe from these Agencies anymore?
If a per­son is act­ing irra­tional­ly it is all the more rea­son to try to deesca­late .Whatever hap­pened to try­ing to resolve issues ?
Why are American cops so deter­mined to kill?

The cou­ple was spot­ted out­side their New York City home on Sunday, with Camille cling­ing to her hus­band’s arm. The 78-year-old come­di­an was dressed down in a white sweat­shirt with the words “Hello Friend” print­ed on it, while Camille wore a long grey coat. Hello Friend is the name of the foun­da­tion the Cosbys set up in hon­or of their late son, Ennis Cosby, who was killed in a failed rob­bery attempt in 1997.

The sight­ing marks the first time in six months that the come­di­an has been pho­tographed. The last pub­lic sight­ing of Cosby was in May dur­ing his appear­ance at Selma High School in Alabama, where he pro­mot­ed education.

Over 50 women have now accused the embat­tled come­di­an of sex­u­al assault. He has denied all wrong­do­ing and has nev­er been charged with a crime.

Last December, Camille defend­ed her hus­band of over 40 years, after the num­ber of women accus­ing him of sex­u­al assault began to grow.

“A dif­fer­ent man has been por­trayed in the media over the last two months,” she said in the state­ment. “It is the por­trait of a man I do not know. It is also a por­trait paint­ed by indi­vid­u­als and orga­ni­za­tions whom many in the media have giv­en a pass. There appears to be no vet­ting of my husband’s accusers before sto­ries are pub­lished or aired. An accu­sa­tion is pub­lished, and imme­di­ate­ly goes viral.”

“None of us will ever want to be in the posi­tion of attack­ing a vic­tim. But the ques­tion should be asked — who is the victim?“she added.

In November 2014, super­mod­el Beverly Johnson briefly talked about Camille, after she claimed Cosby drugged her in 1986 at his home when she came to read for a part on The Cosby Show. Johnson said that when she called to con­front the come­di­an using the pri­vate num­ber he gave her, she was shocked to hear Camille answer the phone.

“A lit­tle shocked, I quick­ly iden­ti­fied myself to her in the most respect­ful way pos­si­ble and then asked to speak to Bill,” Johnson wrote for Vanity Fair. “Camille polite­ly informed me that it was very late, 11 p.m., and that they were both in bed together.”

WATCH: Three New Bill Cosby Accusers Come Forward, Including a Former Mrs. America

Cosby recent­ly had a legal win on Nov. 13, when Judge Debra Katz Weintraub tem­porar­i­ly stayed an order for him to sit for a depo­si­tion in accuser Janice Dickinson’s defama­tion civ­il suit against him. Cosby’s depo­si­tion was orig­i­nal­ly sup­posed to take place on Nov. 23 in Boston, Dickinson’s attor­ney, Lisa Bloom,exclu­sive­ly told ET ear­li­er this month.

Cosby was already ordered to give a depo­si­tion on Oct. 9 in the case of Judy Huth, who claims in a law­suit that he molest­ed her at the Playboy Mansion in 1974 when she was 15. It was ruled the details of that depo­si­tion are to be sealed from the pub­lic until Dec. 22, so the court can decide which por­tions may or may not be kept confidential.

Read more here :Bill Cosby Steps Out for First Time in Six Months, Wife Camille Remains By His Side by Antoinette Bueno 3:50 PM PST, November 24, 2015

Awhile back I had a con­ver­sa­tion with a woman who adamant­ly argued about the virtues of moth­er­hood and it’s impor­tance. She insist­ed moth­er­hood was far more impor­tant than father­hood. I thought to myself “were it left up to many of these women the world’s pop­u­la­tion would have died out long ago”.
She told me women stay at home and wipe snot and take care of their kids as such they love more than any­one else.
I had heard that cocka­mamie all my life and was real­ly fed up with the nonsense >
So I asked her whether fathers who gets up on a scaf­fold­ing to wash win­dows 99 floors above the ground, con­struct sky­scrap­ers, the sol­dier who goes to war, or the Police Officer who goes out every day lay­ing his life on the line count­ed as love, Or whether that’s even love at all?
Her answer was a jum­bled mess of gobbledygook.

For years the Feminist move­ment has rede­fined love between par­ents and chil­dren to some­thing only women could give. This reduced Fathers to pas­sive­ly neutered car­ri­ers of check­books to cater to his wom­an’s needs.
He is pow­er­less to make deci­sions in his home and his chil­dren look to their moth­er for guid­ance and security.
In some eth­nic com­mu­ni­ties the men have sim­ply left.
Many argue that they pay child sup­port. When I first heard this argu­ment about pay­ing child sup­port I was indig­nant that these men are sim­ply bums who do not want to look after their children.
A clos­er look how­ev­er reveals that in many cas­es these men are led to believe mon­ey is all they are required to give .
So even though they are present in the house­hold they have absolute­ly no impact on their chil­dren’s development
I mean in American house­holds many men are mere observers to what occur includ­ing how their chil­dren are raised and they dare not dis­ci­pline their own chil­dren out of fear of the women.
Many sim­ply chose to abdi­cate their respon­si­bil­i­ty because they do not want to deal with the stress of fighting,.
Oh by the way they dare not look to the courts for jus­tice . The fam­i­ly courts may very well be the most unjust arm of the so-called jus­tice system.

Patriot Update puts it this way.
Who fought the bloody bat­tles of the American Revolution that estab­lished America as a free and sov­er­eign nation? It was men. Who draft­ed the Declaration of Independence and Constitution — two of the most sig­nif­i­cant doc­u­ments in human his­to­ry? It was men. Who went chin to chin with Hitler’s storm troop­ers in four years of bru­tal bat­tles and saved the world from Nazi tyran­ny? It was men. Who bat­tled Tojo’s sui­ci­dal troops down to the last man on a string of Pacific islands? It was men? Who con­struct­ed the sky­scrap­ers that give New York City its dis­tinc­tive sky­line? It was men. Who rebuilt New York’s sky­line after it was destroyed by crazed ter­ror­ists on 9 – 11? It was men. In fact, if you exam­ine the actions, inven­tions, deci­sions, and activ­i­ties that made the United States the world’s sole superpower?
Feminists are neu­ter­ing the American male and the American male is let­ting it hap­pen. In his book, Missing from Action: Vanishing Manhood in America, author Welden M. Hardenbrook writes: “Over the years I have had the priv­i­lege of work­ing with the broad spec­trum of men who can only be found in America. No mat­ter who they have been — cap­i­tal­ists, com­mu­nists, col­lege stu­dents, dropouts, Christians, athe­ists, blacks, whites, young, or old — they have had one prob­lem in com­mon. They have suf­fered to one degree or anoth­er from the touch of the fem­i­niz­ing forces that have tak­en over the land. These men have not been sure what it means to be a man…They are men who refuse to take respon­si­bil­i­ty. Their pas­siv­i­ty and inac­tion ensure that…lead­er­ship in their homes belongs to their wives.” Hardenbrook might have added that it isn’t just in the home where men are no longer lead­ers. NEUTERING THE MALE OF THE SPECIES: THE FEMINIZATION OF AMERICAN SOCIETY.

Daughters need to see strong fathers who are tow­ers of strength for their fam­i­lies. Strong fathers are good role-mod­els so they know what to look for when they are ready to date.
Sons also must be giv­en strong role mod­els who are not neutered wus­si­fied male, pet­ri­fied of mak­ing deci­sions because there will be hell to pay because the wives will throw a fit.
In our house­hold its all boys , they play sports both bas­ket­ball and foot­ball, they are engaged in some type of sport­ing activ­i­ty year round.
I very sel­dom make it to a scrim­mage as a self employed per­son . My wife sel­dom miss­es a scrim­mage because her sched­ule allows her that latitude.
Does that mean she loves the boys more than I do ? It would be a mis­take for any­one to come to that conclusion.
I will lay my life down for my chil­dren when the rub­ber meets the road.
None of this stuff define love.
Feminism is not only doing irrepara­ble harm to tra­di­tion­al mar­riage it is hurt­ing Generations to come arguably over­turn­ing the roles between the sexes.
Many of us men are all too hap­py to del­e­gate the respon­si­bil­i­ty to be men .
In America prob­a­bly more so than any place else women are more than will­ing to have men reduced to a joke and men are allow­ing it.

More and more Jamaicans and insti­tu­tions appear to be see­ing the need to have fixed Election dates as opposed to hav­ing the sit­ting Prime Minister decide when to call elec­tions. At best the present mod­el more resem­bles some­thing from a Monarchy as opposed to our Parliamentary Democratic system.
The Private Sector Organization Of Jamaica through it’s head William Mahfood is among the lat­est to add his voice to the cho­rus which includes the Editorial Page of the Jamaica Observer , the Electoral Commission of Jamaica the Opposition Jamaica Labor Party among oth­ers. Ironically this small medi­um and this writer have been call­ing for fixed elec­tion dates for years. Fixed elec­tion dates is not a panacea or sil­ver bul­let for what ails Jamaica but it is one step in the right direc­tion as it relates to Governance.

For years we have argued that a sin­gle indi­vid­ual , (irre­spec­tive of sta­tion or par­ty) hav­ing the pow­er to decide elec­tions is bound to manip­u­late the option and abuse that privileged.
If that pow­er is removed from the hands of politi­cians their abil­i­ty to hold the coun­try to ran­som while they tin­ker with the process to get the results they desire from the polls goes away.
People who Govern are sup­posed to do the best job pos­si­ble of gov­ern­ing. They should enact the poli­cies they cam­paigned on and live with the consequences.
Technically elec­tions are due more than a year from now and of course some are con­fused won­der­ing what then is the fuss about.?
The Constitution demands that elec­tions be held no more than 5 years from the date of the last elections.
The last nation­al polls were held on December 29^th 2011.
The Jamaica Observer and polit­i­cal pun­dits all agree it was the Prime Minister her­self who placed the nation on elec­tion foot­ing by telling her sup­port­ers to quote“Get ready”. Additionally Dr Peter Phillips, had also, dur­ing the cam­paign, stressed the urgency of get­ting the elec­tion out of the way to remove the uncer­tain­ty among some prospec­tive investors and to get the coun­try back on track.

Now con­front­ed with what seem like an immi­nent loss the Prime Minister is walk­ing back all of that now claim­ing she will await God’s touch to decide when to call elec­tions. Of course she awaits Gods touch while giv­ing a pletho­ra of sil­ly rea­sons why she is not yet ready to call elections.
Quote: “You will be appro­pri­ate­ly informed when my mas­ter touch­es me and say ‘my daugh­ter go nigh’,”
This non­sense is no way to run a coun­try. Its time Jamaicans set aside the cur­ry goat and red stripe pol­i­tics and embrace and begin to chart a course if not for them­selves for their chil­dren’s future.

Black Lives Matter activists gath­ered to protest what they say is once again the egre­gious killing of an unarmed hand­cuffed Black man by Police in Minneapolis were fired on alleged­ly by white Supremacists, or by peo­ple opposed to them stand­ing up for their rights.
Before we talk about this any fur­ther it is impor­tant to pause and rec­og­nize that we are not talk­ing about the unlaw­ful killing of an unarmed Black man which pre­cip­i­tat­ed the protest.
We have now moved to talk­ing about Police killing unarmed hand­cuffed Black men.
Demonstrators have set up a camp out­side the Minneapolis Police Department’s 4^th Precinct to protest the fatal police shoot­ing of a black man. Police say they shot Jamar Clark in the head because he inter­fered with para­medics who were treat­ing his girlfriend.

The Police know­ing that this is inde­fen­si­ble argues that he was not cuffed at the time he was shot in the head.
They no longer have to defend the fact that a Black man is unarmed any­more the con­ver­sa­tion has moved on.
Black skin col­or has been weaponized and accept­ed so. Police are well with­in their rights to kill a Black per­son sole­ly on the basis of his/​her skin col­or and there is no debate any­more about weapons.
It’s impor­tant to note just how far the goal-post have been moved by the Supreme Court, the low­er courts and the Mainstream Media to accom­mo­date police mur­der. We are no longer talk­ing about the unmit­i­gat­ed wrong of police offi­cers killing unarmed peo­ple that’s accept­able now, the debate is how to get away with killing peo­ple while they are in handcuffs.

Reports of the inci­dent in Minneapolis indi­cate that Ambulances did not show up until fif­teen min­utes after being called that at least 5 peo­ple have been shot.
the Newyorktimes​.com reports Some wit­ness­es said on Twitter that they had been sprayed with Mace by the police fol­low­ing the shooting.
Some are the­o­ris­ing that the shoot­ers may actu­al­ly have been Police wear­ing ski masks. Protesters said the three men have been show­ing up at the ral­lies film­ing the events and act­ing oth­er­wise shady. This caused them enough con­cern to assign peo­ple to keep an eye on the men.

One thing is clear now as was clear dur­ing the six­ties when King and oth­ers marched for social jus­tice Activists are fight­ing white suprema­cists not just clad in sheets and ski masks but in police uniforms.
It is impor­tant not to for­get that along with that dan­ger is the insti­tu­tion­al­ized sav­agery of white suprema­cy which is deeply and indeli­bly entrenched with­in the sys­tem includ­ing but not con­fined to ambu­lances not show­ing up with dis­patch to deal with the demands of injured victims.

Irrespective of what 24 year-old Jamar Clark did or did not do the ques­tion must be cen­tered on whether it war­rant­ed him being shot in the head cuffed or not?
We have seen this script before in Ferguson Missouri in the shoot­ing of Michael Brown. Shot from a dis­tance away when the cop had all the time to react with­out resort­ing to lethal and dead­ly force. But it did not mat­ter he knew there would be no con­se­quence to him for killing Michael Brown.
The voice of the peo­ple alarmed the sys­tem so Michael Brown became a vicious beast which need­ed to be put down.
It is accept­able for one’s past trans­gres­sions to deter­mine whether police see fit to inflict cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment on the spot in America now.

♦ Institutionalized Racism at the cen­ter of these immoral killings.
♦Institutionalized Racism at the cen­ter of med­ical response.
♦ Institutionalized Racism at the cen­ter of Police aggres­sion even after the shootings.
♦ Institutionalized racism embold­ened the shooters.
♦ Institutionalized Racism will impact the Investigation.
♦ Institutionalized Racism cor­rodes the Courts sys­tem which makes it impos­si­ble for Blacks to get Justice, par­tic­u­lar­ly at state levels.
♦ Institutionalized Racism in the report­ing of events.
♦Institutionalized Racism in the medi­a’s nar­ra­tive on the aforementioned .
♦ Institutionalized Racism con­tin­ues the insid­i­ous tox­ic can­cer which con­tin­ues to eat away at the foun­da­tion of this nation.
Because one set of peo­ple want to have rights and guar­an­tees no one else should.

This seri­ous prob­lem is not just a prob­lem on American soil it shapes opin­ions and per­cep­tions about America on the International stage.
In the mean­time the Right wing fas­cists run­ning for the Presidency riles up the most vile racist xeno­pho­bic ele­ments of their base against every­one not a white Anglo-Saxon.
I won­der how they plan on Governing the mess they are creating ?
Already things are get­ting quite com­pli­cat­ed around the Globe adding fuel to the fire hard­ly seem like a smart strat­e­gy but they have dived in head­first advo­cat­ing for more of what got us to this point, we shall see.

One of the things I learned as a child from my care­givers was to “speak the truth and speak it ever cost it what it will he who hides the wrong he did does the wrong thing still”>
Now I’m a man I still hear the same refrain today , most­ly from rich white men who refer to them­selves as Christian Conservatives.
I have always con­sid­ered myself a Christian by faith even before I gave my life to the lord, because I was raised in a Christian home. It was that fun­da­men­tal belief in God which pre­vent­ed me from steal­ing, killing, and doing oth­er things some find social­ly unacceptable.

As I delib­er­at­ed for myself the mer­its of giv­ing my life to Christ I sought to find ways to be Christ-like . I want­ed to do the things Christ told us to do. I thought about Matthew 26:11 a woman broke an Alabaster box of pre­cious oint­ment, she then used the oint­ment to wash Jesus’ feet then used her hair to dry them.
His dis­ci­ples were not pleased but Jesus know­ing their thoughts said unto them …10“Why do you both­er the woman? For she has done a good deed to Me. 11“For you always have the poor with you; but you do not always have Me. 12“For when she poured this per­fume on My body, she did it to pre­pare Me for burial.…

I will not talk about my inter­pre­ta­tion of Conservatism suf­fice to say that Merriam​-Webster​.com. char­ac­ter­izes it this way.
CONSERVATISM<>A polit­i­cal phi­los­o­phy based on tra­di­tion and social sta­bil­i­ty, stress­ing estab­lished insti­tu­tions, and pre­fer­ring grad­ual devel­op­ment to abrupt change; specif­i­cal­ly : such a phi­los­o­phy call­ing for low­er tax­es, lim­it­ed gov­ern­ment reg­u­la­tion of busi­ness and invest­ing, a strong nation­al defense, and indi­vid­ual finan­cial respon­si­bil­i­ty for per­son­al needs (as retire­ment income or health-care coverage).

On the basis of what Christ wants us to do I con­sid­er myself a Christian despite my filthy-rags dis­po­si­tionn at times. I also see cer­tain ele­ments of my per­son­al belief sys­tem in Merriam Webster’s elo­quent char­ac­ter­i­za­tion of Conservatism.
I am not par­tic­u­lar­ly sold on the con­cept of  indi­vid­ual finan­cial respon­si­bil­i­ty for per­son­al needs (as retire­ment income or health-care coverage.
I do believe Government has a role to play in help­ing those who are unable to help them­selves, not those who refuse to help themselves.

Despite my best efforts I haven’t found much com­mon­al­i­ty with the polit­i­cal right’s protes­ta­tions of either Christianity or Conservatism and my ideas of either.
The Bible says by their fruits you shall know them.Matthew 7:20 …19“Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.20“So then, you will know them by their fruits. 21“Not every­one who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the king­dom of heav­en, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heav­en will enter.…

I don’t want to judge who fit the bill of a chris­t­ian and who does­n’t but when a philo­soph­i­cal per­spec­tive espous­es Christian prin­ci­ples yet does every­thing anti­thet­i­cal to the faith I feel duty bound to at least say to peo­ple uncon­vinced or con­fused at the dis­con­nect between words and deeds that they are char­la­tans and impostors.

♦The Political right espous­es the right to life, I am not opposed, it is nev­er man’s right to take life. Yet their defense of life stops after a woman gives birth.
They stead­fast­ly believe a woman absolute­ly have no right to ter­mi­nate a preg­nan­cy even preg­nan­cies which emanat­ed from rapes or inces­tu­ous assaults.
Now Like I said pre­vi­ous­ly I refuse to play God it’s above my pay-grade to decide who live or die like some white peo­ple believe when they deny tax­pay­ers funds to help care for chil­dren after birth.
They oppose food-stamps and oth­er ben­e­fits which would give babies the most basic sustenance.
They oppose every oth­er forms of Governmental assis­tance which would sus­tain life even to those who can­not help themselves.
Where is the chris­t­ian empa­thy and love

Yet they want mas­sive buildup of mil­i­tary arse­nal at the expense of social pro­grams which would aid the least able to take care of themselves.
Ironically they have no prob­lem giv­ing lucra­tive tax-breaks to mega cor­po­ra­tions which absolute­ly does not need the money.
And this is just on the char­i­ty end of the spectrum.
In order to elic­it sym­pa­thy from them one has to be white Anglo-Saxon regard­less of the trav­es­ty being vis­it­ed on the vic­tim. Where is their empa­thy for their fel­low man? Where is their fideli­ty and obe­di­ence to the teach­ings of Jesus Christ?

In order to make Jesus palat­able to them­selves they had to change per­cep­tions of what Jesus looked like. So Jesus Christ could not con­tin­ue to be a dark-skinned Jewish man he had to be recre­at­ed to look like a long haired white male> Without equiv­o­ca­tion that lev­el of inse­cu­ri­ty and hatred has got to be genetic.

♦ One of the amaz­ing things to me is their dis­gust­ing inabil­i­ty to speak the truth . This is not a ques­tion of Left and Right , it’s a issue of White.
How do you straight faced call your­self a Christian then lie through your teeth ?
If God was venge­ful where would these white men be?
Dr. John Henrik Clarke . born January 1, 1915 died July 16, 1998 Writer ‚Historian Professor, Hunter College in New York and at Cornell University.
When the ear­ly Europeans first met Africans, at the cross­roads of his­to­ry, it was a respect­ful meet­ing and the Africans were not slaves. Their nations were old before Europe was born. In this peri­od of his­to­ry, what was to be lat­er known as “Africa” was an unknown place to the peo­ple who would some­day be called, “Europeans.” Only the peo­ple of some of the Mediterranean Islands and a few states of what would become the Greek and Roman areas knew of parts of North Africa, and that was a land of mys­tery. After the rise and decline of Greek civ­i­liza­tion and the Roman destruc­tion of the city of Carthage, they made the con­quered ter­ri­to­ries into a province which they called Africa, a word derived from “afri” and the name of a group of peo­ple about whom lit­tle is known. At first the word applied only to the Roman colonies in North Africa. There was a time when all dark-skinned peo­ple were called Ethiopians, for the Greeks referred to Africa.
Why Africana History? by Dr. John Henrik Clarke.

The unmit­i­gat­ed gall to copy an entire peo­ple’s his­to­ry then do every­thing in their pow­er to remove every trace of the great­ness and grace of our ances­tors is dumbfounding.
Black Lives mat­ter Activists are now some­how anti-law enforce­ment? Why would any Black per­son be for a Law Enforcement mod­el which kills their sons and daugh­ters aunts and uncles and gets away with it.
What unvar­nished arrogance?
Students don’t have the right to rise up on University Campuses and speak out against racial oppres­sion in their Schools, their com­mu­ni­ties, their coun­try, because some white guy decides who should speak and who shouldn’t?
On what Planet is this sus­tain­able and with­out consequence?

When stu­dents at Dartmouth protest in sol­i­dar­i­ty with stu­dents of Mizzou and Yale white peo­ple get into chatt rooms and use all kinds of con­de­scend­ing lan­guage , clear­ly what they want is for black peo­ple to shut up and endure anoth­er 400 hun­dred years of tyranny.
Instead of relat­ing to the obscene pogrom which have been vis­it­ed on African peo­ple in this coun­try and around the world and still con­tin­ue today as some whites have done the major­i­ty of them wants silence.
Who the hell do they thing they are?

They engi­neer wars across the Globe . They engi­neer over­throw of gov­ern­ments with whom they dis­agree then label free­dom fight­ers terrorists.
How sus­tain­able will this con­tin­ue to be? How many more years will the black and brown peo­ple of the Globe lay dor­mant even with the rav­ages of geno­cide inflict­ed on them through arti­fi­cial dis­eases ‚wars and oth­er meth­ods of exter­mi­na­tion? Do they think we are too stu­pid to under­stand whats going on ?

There is no Christian in their brand of Conservatism let’s be clear about that. In the same way there was no Christianity in their hearts when they inter­act­ed with the Africans and Native Indians then mer­ci­less­ly mas­sa­cred them, there is no Christianity in their hearts today.
They are the sons and daugh­ters of dark­ness and the soon­er we speak to these truths the better.
When Black peo­ple rise up and say Black lives mat­ter what the hell is their prob­lem ? All these peo­ple are say­ing is “our lives mat­ter too” ! Their lives have always mattered.

We do not need them to val­i­date this move­ment, and we cer­tain­ly do not need the val­i­da­tion and sup­port of those whom Professor Clarke so appro­pri­ate­ly refer to as “white butt kissers”.
The fact that they are up in arms is that it’s caus­ing them some dis­qui­et, some dis­com­fort, on that basis alone Black Lives Matter must not only con­tin­ue it must intensify.
For hun­dreds of years they have mas­sa­cred and raped with impuni­ty, they have intim­i­dat­ed and wreaked all kinds of geno­cide and ter­ror and Blacks peo­ple stood silent­ly by and allowed them to get away with it.
It must end. Why would they not be indig­nant now they have always had things their way ? “Yes mas­sa suh” !!

It was January of 1982 I was gid­dy with excite­ment, I had just entered the Police Training school at Port Royal. Little did I know that I would spend a full year between Port Royal and Twickenham Park which would even­tu­al­ly become what we now know as the Jamaica Police Academy.

It is kin­da strange how I end­ed up at Twickenham Park despite join­ing the JCF and found my way on the back of a truck des­tined for Port Royal.
In High School my Agriculture Science Teacher mis­ter Bascoe thought that I was some­thing spe­cial , I nev­er quite fig­ured out why, I always thought myself an aver­age stu­dent but teach­ers I love them. Mister Bascoe gave me an all expense paid trip to the Twickenham Park facil­i­ty which was the Jamaica School of Agriculture at the time.
I fell in love with the place, I redou­bled my efforts back in mis­ter Boscoe’s Agri sci­ences class­es so I could make him proud.

It was­n’t long after that that the Jamaica school of agri­cul­ture was dis­band­ed and the facil­i­ty was giv­en to the Ministry of National Security, it would lat­er become the new home for police trainees.
My choic­es after leav­ing high school were Mico Teacher’s col­lege or the Police depart­ment, I had no inten­tion of going to Knockalva Agricultural School in Ramble Hanover.
Port Royal here I come..

The choice for me at the time was pret­ty easy. Coming from a fam­i­ly where mon­ey was some­thing we read about. No one need­ed to con­vince me that at that time the Police depart­ment would be a bet­ter fit.
Police recruits are paid as soon as they start train­ing not so for colleges.
The even­tu­al hun­dred plus of us who start­ed train­ing in June of 1982 would be the very first batch of young con­sta­bles to begin and com­plete train­ing at the Jamaica police academy.

There is a lot to be said about any­one who decide to become a police offi­cer. There is even more to be said about any­one dar­ing to be a police offi­cer in Jamaica eas­i­ly one of the most law­less places . The peo­ple are large­ly unin­formed yet high­ly opin­ion­at­ed, a some­times potent mix.
It cer­tain­ly did not take me long to real­ize that this was not the best place to be a police officer.
One of the things I hear now which I heard for the decade I served is that the police are only there for the money.
There is alway a cer­tain ele­ment of truth to the argu­ment that peo­ple work because they need money.
There is much more to the argu­ment when that per­son actu­al­ly place his/​her life on the line for that pay­check. On that basis I nev­er quite under­stood the log­ic of that argument.
Having seen the attri­tion rate from the police depart­ment over the years it cer­tain­ly does not enhance the mon­e­tary argu­ments police detrac­tors make.

After grad­u­at­ing from the Academy it did not take long for me to real­ize that despite my love for the rule of law the depart­ment would not be my last car­rear stop. The job was dif­fi­cult the pay was shit­ty but the peo­ple who led the depart­ment made the job more dif­fi­cult and shit­ti­er than it need­ed to be.

Every young con­sta­ble who enters the Police ser­vices is book­end­ed by the per­ils on the streets and the ego­ma­ni­a­cal king­pins who super­vise the high­er up the worse they are.
Subsequently cops are stressed, many offi­cers seek escape in alco­hol and oth­er vices
Others sim­ply decide to look out for themselves.

Most impor­tant­ly how­ev­er I real­ized that it was not in the cards that I would con­tin­ue risk­ing my life for a nation which sim­ply did not believe in the rule of law.
People dis­agree some­what with that sen­ti­ment but the facts are clear. Only the poor­est of the poor coun­try folks allow their chil­dren to enter law enforce­ment. Mothers active­ly coun­sel their chil­dren nev­er to become police officers.
The brunt of that bur­den falls to poor rur­al folks to sac­ri­fice and bury their chil­dren in ser­vice to country.

Many today who become Police offi­cers are risk averse even with bul­let proof vests , com­put­ers and oth­er mod­ern tools.
During the Seaga years when I served we were record­ing 300 mur­ders annu­al­ly, at the time I thought we were fail­ing dis­mal­ly in what we were sup­posed to be doing.
I thought then that we could have done bet­ter even with the short­ages of resources which would have saved a lot more lives and reduced some of the loss to citizens.
As I have said repeat­ed­ly in oth­er arti­cles being a police offi­cer brought out some of the great­est emo­tions in me. Usually love and admi­ra­tion for our coun­try’s poor­est and dispossessed.
Conversely I devel­oped a pal­pa­ble dis­dain for those who con­sid­ered them­selves élite, they ben­e­fit­ed most from the sac­ri­fice we made while short cir­cuit­ing law-enforce­ment efforts but giv­ing noth­ing back to make our coun­try better.

I walked away from law enforce­ment under­stand­ing that I would not make a sig­nif­i­cant dif­fer­ence in the fight to make Jamaica a coun­try of laws. It was not going to be done from a law enforce­ment posi­tion. There were sim­ply too many forces with their own inter­est which want­ed a crime culture.
I can­not lie that I was not annoyed by the ghet­to cul­ture which demo­nizes police. However I was nev­er par­tic­u­lar­ly swayed one way or the oth­er by it. I knew that with the right lead­er­ship the man on the street was movable.
With the right lead­er­ship peo­ple con­form. The prob­lem for Jamaica was nev­er that the aver­age guy was unswayable, the prob­lem is that no one in lead­er­ship was doing the right kind of swaying.

The prob­lem of law­less­ness which exist today did not hap­pen all by itself. There has been over half a cen­tu­ry of cul­tur­al oppo­si­tion to the rule of law. Unfortunately for the few sane Jamaicans still liv­ing there who believe things will change for the bet­ter I can­not offer any words of comfort.
If you plant corn for a mil­lion years for a mil­lion years you will reap corn.
Rather than look at mod­els which work in oth­er coun­tries refine them to suit our par­tic­u­lar cir­cum­stances Jamaican lead­ers either did noth­ing or active­ly stood in the way of bet­ter law enforcement.

This year like all the years before over a thou­sand and a half peo­ple will be slaugh­tered on the Island of 2.7 million.
Countless chil­dren will be raped and sodom­ized ( boys and girls) . Many more will be traf­ficked into pros­ti­tu­tion and oth­er vices. Hundreds more will be seri­ous­ly hurt and dis­fig­ured from vicious assaults.
More hous­es will be fire­bombed and chil­dren muti­lat­ed and killed.
The Island’s lead­ers will do absolute­ly noth­ing about it.

In the end the peo­ple will con­tin­ue to glo­ri­fy crim­i­nal “dons”, even as they lament the crime spree, wash away the blood and bury their dead.
From as ear­ly as I can recall the police was “baby­lon bways”, my look at the Island’s his­to­ry reveals noth­ing the police did to turn the peo­ple from respect­ing the rule of law. Conversely what I saw was a peo­ple opposed to dis­ci­pline which invari­ably changed the police to start look­ing out for themselves.
The afore­men­tioned is in no way a state­ment of sup­port for cor­rup­tion it is sim­ply a state­ment of fact..

When a coun­try cre­ate and cul­ti­vate a cul­ture of dis­re­spect for author­i­ty that coun­try should not be sur­prised when it reaps a har­vest of mur­der and mayhem.
The Island’s lead­ers are large­ly crim­i­nals in pri­vate, I say that with­out equiv­o­ca­tion . It is not a stretch to the­o­rize that the rea­son they allowed the Police depart­ment and the rule of law to dete­ri­o­rate is that a com­pe­tent police depart­ment is a great threat to their abil­i­ties to milk the coun­try dry.

Today the depart­ment has a lot of mem­bers with degrees , these peo­ple worked hard to earn their degrees and must be com­pen­sat­ed com­men­su­rate with their edu­ca­tion, the down­side to this is a top heavy force which is demor­al­ized. Many of it’s mem­bers are not in it to reduce crime, it’s lead­er­ship worse.
Those who take the risks are not reward­ed I have spo­ken to enough cops who tell me the same story.

The Nation missed a tremen­dous oppor­tu­ni­ty to do a top down audit of what ailed the force dur­ing the ear­ly 2000’ .
That audit would have revealed that the force need­ed new edu­cat­ed lead­er­ship capa­ble of under­stand­ing the secu­ri­ty chal­lenges fac­ing the coun­try in the 21^st cen­tu­ry but that the force also need­ed tough hon­est ded­i­cat­ed offi­cers do get the job done.
Had the Political direc­torate done that audit it would have rec­og­nized that many of the prob­lems of cor­rup­tion and alle­ga­tions of abuse could be fixed with.…
Better pay . Better train­ing. Better equip­ment. Better super­vi­sion. Better accountability.
Instead of fix­ing the prob­lem they went ahead and cre­at­ed anoth­er Agency which fur­ther exac­er­bate crime con­trary to what the bone­heads tell you.

But the prob­lems were the cre­ation of the very peo­ple whose respon­si­bil­i­ty it was to pre­serve the safe­ty of the population.
During the Patterson years there was no mon­ey made avail­able to train a sin­gle detec­tive for over sev­en years despite the sky­rock­et­ing mur­der sta­tis­tics. Sure police offi­cers were walk­ing around with big guns but big guns do pre­cious lit­tle to deter crim­i­nals who gen­er­al­ly do not com­mit crimes in front of police.

Jamaica has always had prob­lems con­tain­ing crime but for those focused on this prob­lem this was essen­tial­ly when Jamaica lost the fight against law­less­ness under the pathet­ic lead­er­ship of Percival James Patterson.
Patterson’s lead­er­ship or lack there­of ush­ered in a peri­od of law­less­ness which was not seen before on the Island. Ironically he did not lift a fin­ger to do a damn thing to stop it. He was too busy pil­lag­ing the coun­try’s economy.

It is lit­tle won­der then the present occu­pant of Jamaica house Patterson’s pro­tégé, has no empa­thy for Jamaicans includ­ing police offi­cers whose blood con­tin­ue to run yet she is vocif­er­ous with sup­port for the fam­i­lies of the dead in France.
Every day we wit­ness police offi­cers afraid to do their job of enforc­ing even the sim­plest traf­fic law because of course they will cer­tain­ly be assault­ed and they dare not respond with­out being sub­ject to crim­i­nal proceedings.
I am sor­ry to remind those wait­ing for low­er crime in Jamaica there will be a very long wait .……

Cheap parochial pol­i­tics is still the norm in Jamaica, whomev­er hold pow­er uses that pow­er to the max­i­mum to in fact stay in power.
For years I have been shout­ing in the wilder­ness that the time has come for Jamaica to set fixed National elec­tion dates, effec­tive­ly remov­ing that pow­er from the sit­ting Prime Minister regard­less of the par­ty in power.
It’s the year 2015 and I was shocked to hear Jamaica’s Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller assert in rela­tion to immi­nent elections.

“The jour­ney might be long and I’m not telling you that the cam­paign will not be long. And I hear every­body guess­ing whether I’m going to call elec­tion or not. You will be appro­pri­ate­ly informed when my mas­ter touch­es me and say, ‘my daugh­ter go [now]’,”
“And as I go around, I will feel the pulse and then at the right time I will give you the sound­ing of the trum­pet. Oh my Comrades, see the sig­nal wav­ing in the sky reinforcement…victory, vic­to­ry, vic­to­ry is nigh,” .

Let’s be clear nation­al elec­tions are not con­sti­tu­tion­al­ly due until ear­ly 2017 , how­ev­er the Nation has been on elec­tion foot­ing for months now. The Prime Minister’s own words con­firms that fact.
Yet she con­tin­ues to play with the Nation’s busi­ness like it’s her per­son­al lit­tle social club .
As a firm believ­er in God I find it an affront that she would inti­mate that some­how God Almighty will some­how tell her when to call elections.
If God was in the busi­ness of speak­ing to Portia he would have done so long ago regard­ing the plight of the peo­ple in the coun­try under her stewardship.
But more so he cer­tain­ly would have harsh words for her about her four decades in pol­i­tics, the pover­ty of the peo­ple she gov­erns and the con­di­tion of her con­stituen­cy of South West St. Andrew the most deplorable in the country.

Fixed elec­tion dates forces politi­cians to per­form then face the peo­ple come elec­tion time. Leaving it to the par­ty in pow­er to decide when elec­tions are called allows manip­u­la­tion of the process as we are wit­ness­ing again.
She allud­ed to that very point.
“As I go around, I will feel the pulse and then at the right time I will give you the sound­ing of the trum­pet”
Unwittingly ele­vat­ing her­self to deity , but more so reveal­ing her par­ty’s true inten­tions behind her manip­u­la­tion of the process.
Internal polls are alleged to show her trail­ing bad­ly , jux­ta­pose that with the tur­moil in her par­ty sur­round­ing who will rep­re­sent cer­tain con­stituen­cies , the astro­nom­i­cal high cost of liv­ing and the pover­ty and mis­ery index, Miller is under­stand­ably afraid to face the electorate.

So while she prays for God to change con­di­tions even as she has had years to do her job and did not, the entire civ­il soci­ety is fever­ish­ly work­ing to change the par­a­digm to once again fool the gullible and unin­formed electorate.
Just today the Jamaica Gleaner report­ed that Gas prices will be going down a whop­ping $3.47 .

Petrojam has announced a $3.47 cut in the prices of gaso­line effec­tive tomor­row. E10 87 gaso­line will sell for $94.77 per litre while E10 90 octane will sell for $96.42 per litre. Meanwhile, the price of Automotive Diesel Oil will move down by $2.42 per litre to sell for $92.08. A litre of kerosene will go down by $2.59 to sell for $87.90. Propane cook­ing gas will sell for $32.08 per litre fol­low­ing a cut of $1.25 while butane will move down by $1.11 to sell for $39.95 per litre. Marketing com­pa­nies and retail­ers will add their respec­tive markups to the announced prices.

The price of Oil and nat­ur­al gas has trend­ed down for almost two years now. Gas in some parts of New York State is now under $2 per gal­lon as opposed to $5 at the heights of the gas price increase that rep­re­sent an over 60% reduc­tion in price. How con­ve­nient it is that just now gas prices will be low­ered by a whop­ping $3.47 as talk ramps up about elections?
Additionally the Government has announced that there will soon be an auto­mo­bile assem­bly plant in St Catherine which will poten­tial­ly employ thou­sands. The Bank of Jamaica not to be out­done has announced that the Jamaican Dollar is no longer overvalued.
To the aver­age per­son some of these state­ments may not mean much but to those tuned into the process these and oth­er fore­casts and asser­tions rep­re­sents a coun­try going in the right direc­tion. A County poised for growth and pros­per­i­ty which is exact­ly the oppo­site of the truth .

The PNP has mas­tered the art of polit­i­cal manip­u­la­tion and dis­tor­tion. It has woven it’s way into every crevasse of nation­al life like a can­cer­ous tumor. This effec­tive­ly politi­cizes every Governmental func­tion inevitably por­tray­ing the Administration and par­ty as benev­o­lent provider.
The Party has effec­tive­ly destroyed the coun­try’s econ­o­my in its rapa­cious pur­suit of state power.
Effectively reduc­ing our coun­try to a Banana Republic which refus­es to acknowl­edge it is a banana republic.