Well just as we have said on so many occa­sions before, Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu fac­ing defeat and des­per­ate to hold onto pow­er in electeions sched­uled for Tuesday March 17 said, as long as he is Prime Minister there will be no State of Palestine.
Well wow , take a moment to digest that statement.
For years Israel has gob­bled up Palestinian ter­ri­to­ry with unprece­dent­ed rapaciousness.
Many peo­ple have seen it for what it is, a craven land grab, end of story.

American Presidents from Carter to Clinton, to Bush and now Obama has demand­ed that as part of any peace­ful end to the pro­tract­ed Israeli /​Palestinian con­flict, Israel must stop build­ing set­tle­ments on Palestinian lands. Nevertheless none of them did any­thing to stop the Billions of tax-pay­ers dol­lars which pour into Israel annu­al­ly ‚even as Israel thumbs its nose in contempt.
Ariel Sharone once said it was real easy to move America to do its bidding.
Israel argues they need to con­fis­cate more ter­ri­to­ry to place a buffer between them and their enemies.
That entire argu­ment is flawed and unwor­thy of seri­ous dis­cus­sion. Based on that argu­ment Israel would per­pet­u­al­ly need to c take ter­ri­to­ry until Palestinians are forced out of the region all together.

Frustrated with that argu­ment , for­mer President Bill Clinton stat­ed some time ago, Israel should state it does not want a two state solu­tion and live with the con­se­quences. President Carter who worked assid­u­ous­ly to bro­ker peace between the two par­ties, and bro­kered the his­toric 1978 peace treaty between Israel and Egypt have been fac­tu­al­ly forth­right in talk­ing about Israel’s atroc­i­ties against the Palestinian people.

President carter said that the state of Israel is worse than the Apartheid sys­tem which exist­ed in South Africa. Carter out­raged many Jews who are gen­er­al­ly above crit­i­cism with his 2006 book “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid.
In the Book President Carter said quote:” “The bot­tom line is this: Peace will come to Israel and the Middle East only when the Israeli gov­ern­ment is will­ing to com­ply with inter­na­tion­al law, with the Road-map for Peace, with offi­cial American pol­i­cy, with the wish­es of a major­i­ty of its own cit­i­zens — and hon­or its own pre­vi­ous com­mit­ments — by accept­ing its legal bor­ders,” end quote.…
In response American Jewish Committee head David Harris respond­ed in a col­umn for The Jerusalem Post. “In accept­ing the Palestinian nar­ra­tive, Carter has con­ve­nient­ly revised his­to­ry, excused the Palestinians for their trag­ic fail­ure to come to terms with Israel each time the chance pre­sent­ed itself, and blithe­ly ignored Israel’s very legit­i­mate secu­ri­ty con­cerns,” Harris wrote in 2006. 

“Many Israelis, includ­ing those that once great­ly admired his role in fos­ter­ing peace with Egypt, may nev­er again trust Carter’s diplo­ma­cy, includ­ing his vaunt­ed role as an elec­tion mon­i­tor. He can no longer claim to be an hon­est broker.”

So there you have it they only have use for you when you agree with them.
After the expect­ed fire­wall of protest from Jews and their sup­port­ers, Carter offered up a mea cul­pa of sorts in March of 2010. By the sum­mer of that very year Carter was forced to slam Israel once again in an op-ed piece quote:
“There is no humane or legal jus­ti­fi­ca­tion for the way the Israeli Defense Forces are con­duct­ing this war,” the two for­mer pres­i­dents wrote. “Israeli bombs, mis­siles, and artillery have pul­ver­ized large parts of Gaza, includ­ing thou­sands of homes, schools, and hos­pi­tals. More than 250,000 peo­ple have been dis­placed from their homes in Gaza. Hundreds of Palestinian non­com­bat­ants have been killed. Much of Gaza has lost access to water and elec­tric­i­ty com­plete­ly. This is a human­i­tar­i­an catastrophe.”

Netanyahu’s state­ment came after polls in Israel showed him los­ing ground in elec­tions slat­ed for Tuesday. Some observers have opined that Netanyahu’s address to a joint ses­sion of con­gress in defi­ance of President Obama’s efforts to get a deal with Iran may have backfired.
Running in a tight race against Isaac Herzog, his com­peti­tor from the Zionist Union par­ty. Experts say the race is too close to call.
“I think any­one who is going to estab­lish a Palestinian state and to evac­u­ate ter­ri­to­ry is giv­ing rad­i­cal Islam a stag­ing ground against the State of Israel,” 

On these pages we have con­sis­tent­ly main­tained that the Zionist state is not inter­est­ed in a two state solution.
Peace is not in Israel’s plans, nev­er was. Ariel Sharone and now Benjamin Netanyahu has no inter­est in peace. 
Netanyahu like Sharone, under­stands the sim­plic­i­ty of mak­ing that a real­i­ty, as far as America is concerned.
Continue to set­tle more land, Palestinians respond to the injus­tice, Israel reacts with over­whelm­ing force, there is no consequence.
Of course Israel has no oblig­a­tion to respect International law. Bombing schools, hos­pi­tals and res­i­dences are quite nor­mal. It’s just Palestinian lives at stake.
Their argument?
We need more land to sep­a­rate us from the ter­ror­ist Palestinians ., so they take more and the cycle con­tin­ues . Never mind that it is Israel which has the nuclear weapons and the cut­ting edge weapon­ry, the best in the world, as against the down­trod­den Palestinians throw­ing rocks and blow­ing them­selves up in exasperation.

They do all this withAmerica’s back­ing of course.

I’m cer­tain­ly no fan of the Democratic Party, it is weak ‚It’s unfo­cused and a frac­tious throw-togeth­er of self-serv­ing inter­est groups.
With that said, faced with the unpalat­able prospect of the two polit­i­cal par­ties, right mind­ed peo­ple have to hold their noses and side with the Democrats.
It’s not as if the Democratic par­ty is better,(less bad). It’s just that the Republican Party has den­i­grat­ed to such depths of Racism and is so sold out to the 1% of the wealth­i­est Oligarchs, there is hard­ly any alter­na­tive but to cast one’s lot with the lousy Democrats.

Whether you are a fan of President Obama or not, one has to won­der whether Republicans are mind­ful that what they are doing to him is prece­dent setting?
Republicans want con­trol of the White House.
To them, the Executive branch is the crème-de-la-crème of the three branch­es of Government as long as a Republican is the occupant.
Not so much when Democrats occu­py the Executive Mansion.Then Republicans are hell-bent on using what­ev­er clout they hold between the Legislative and Judicial branch to stymie the effec­tive­ness of whichev­er Democrat is in the white house.

In recent times they did it to Presidents Carter and Clinton, but nei­ther of the two saw the ven­om and hatred which has been direct­ed at Barack Obama.
Of course what Obama faces is more than the idea that no demo­c­rat should occu­py the white house but also over four hun­dred years of raw white supremacy.
They do not believe a black man should ever enter much less occu­py the white house.
Incredibly they have ques­tioned Obama’s com­pe­tence, of course none of the elect­ed ones could cred­i­bly ques­tion his aca­d­e­m­ic qual­i­fi­ca­tions for the job. So they had a polit­i­cal wannabe, the buf­foon Donald Trump do it.
Obama is a Harvard edu­cat­ed con­sti­tu­tion­al lawyer so that did not work.
It did not stop them from ques­tion­ing the place of his birth, to this day they argue he was born in Kenya.
Ironically, dur­ing the 2008 elec­tions between Obama and John McCain, when the birther [sic] issue emerged, no one both­ered to men­tion that John McCain was born on a mil­i­tary base some­where in the Panama Canal zone.
There was no great out­cry dur­ing George Romney’s 1968 bid for the GOP nomination .
There is also silent acqui­es­cence sur­round­ing the divi­sive Ted Cruz’s Presidential ambi­tions, even though he was born in Calgary Canada.
So what is it that gives legit­i­ma­cy to the birther issue as it regards Obama if not race, you decide?

The poi­so­nous McCain has always pre­tend­ed to be a ratio­nal per­son. McCain has been care­ful to pick and chose instances when to appear rea­son­able. For exam­ple dur­ing the 2008 elec­tions when a big­ot­ed old woman told him at an event that she did not trust Obama because he was an Arab who did not belong here. The seem­ing­ly ratio­nal McCain told her then quote”. “No ma’am,[Obama’s] a decent fam­i­ly man, cit­i­zen, that I just hap­pen to have dis­agree­ments with on fun­da­men­tal issues.” Sounds rea­son­able enough right? The truth is, John McCain saw the polls and he knew he would lose that elec­tion. He was in dam­age con­trol mode then.
In fact no one ever accused John McCain of being bright, rather than defend Arab-Americans as decent peo­ple wor­thy of trust, McCain fed into the hatred in the crowd by telling that igno­rant old woman that Obama was not an Arab.
So what if he was Arabic?
Where in the con­sti­tu­tion of the United States does it pre­clude an Arab from run­ning for the Presidency of the United States? I will how­ev­er leave Arabs to defend themselves.
At the time McCain had Arabs like Daryl Issa sup­port­ing him and in some cas­es there were Arabs active­ly cam­paign­ing for him. There have also been Arab-Americans who have giv­en exem­plary ser­vice to this coun­try . Former US Senate major­i­ty leader George Mitchell and four stars General John Abizaid, for­mer Commander of the US Central Command, just two of the many.

To sug­gest that McCain was being mag­nan­i­mous then, would be to praise a man who sets fire to a build­ing then call the fire department.
It was McCain who chose the poi­so­nous hate-mon­ger Sarah Palin and released her onto the nation.
The raw big­otry which the world saw dur­ing the 2008 cam­paign was unprece­dent­ed and unwar­rant­ed. Yet John McCain stood by and did noth­ing as Palin poured the accel­er­ant of hate stok­ing the smol­der­ing embers of America’s big­otry and hate which lay just beneath the surface.
The resul­tant infer­no of racial ani­mus now engulf­ing America was reignit­ed on John McCain’s watch.
There is no rea­son­able­ness in McCain.
Every major pol­i­cy deci­sion McCain has tak­en, includ­ing choos­ing Sarah Palin has been dis­as­trous and wrong.
Unfortunately John McCain has been insu­lat­ed from crit­i­cism since his release from a Hanoi POW camp in March of 1973.
The brain-dead media is unwill­ing to con­front John McCain with the fol­ly of his posi­tions, wrong on every issue.
Never mind that McCain has con­sis­tent­ly got­ten every issue wrong, the media still puts him on nation­al tele­vi­sion as if he is some kind of for­eign pol­i­cy heavy-weight.

It should come as no sur­prise to any rea­son­able per­son that McCain still hold a grudge for the shel­lack­ing he took from the black guy.
It also should come as no sur­prise that McCain’s office has said that he will not sup­port Federal Prosecutor Loretta Lynch to be the next Attorney General and the first black woman to hold that post.
Every President is enti­tled under the con­sti­tu­tion to his nom­i­nees, that includes Obama.
There is noth­ing real­ly which they can point to in the past of Loretta Lynch which would dis­qual­i­fy her from being the next AG.
In fact Lynch who is supreme­ly qual­i­fied, has far bet­ter char­ac­ter than the Republican Senators who are hold­ing up her con­fir­ma­tion out of spite for the president.
McCain’s col­league Chuck Grassley — one of just four Republicans who have expressed sup­port for Lynch — said at her hear­ing: “If we can’t con­firm Loretta Lynch, then I don’t believe we can con­firm anyone”.

My ques­tion to Democrats is this, “are you tak­ing notes”?
One day they will have a pres­i­dent in the white house, what will you do then?
Are you going to rub­ber-stamp every­one and every­thing they bring to a vote as you have done over the decades?
Are you going to allow your­selves to be rail-road­ed into giv­ing them carte-blanche as you did with the Patriot Act?
This coun­try is becom­ing a shell of it’s own stat­ed ideals.
Why?
Because a bunch of racist reac­tionar­ies have tak­en con­trol of one par­ty and the oth­er par­ty is too cow­ard­ly to fight back.
On issue after issue they have been proven wrong, yet time and again, they have been allowed to drag America to the brink, because the Democratic par­ty is too weak to stand up for America.
Too weak and divid­ed to stand up for it’s own President.

What we do not hear in black church­es is a fac­tu­al rev­e­la­tion of the true his­to­ry of this coun­try we now come to know as America.
What we do not hear is a run­ning his­tor­i­cal com­men­tary which tells the true sto­ry of this country.
That the lying Christopher Columbus and the white suprema­cist nar­ra­tive which evolved from his exploita­tive for­ay into this sec­tion of the Globe was one of lies and deception.
What black pas­tors do not preach is that when this demon land­ed here he saw black man and brown man liv­ing here in peace., side by side.

You can­not preach it if you do not know it .
Farrakhan knows it , that’s why unabashed­ly and unafraid he tells it.
That is why they hate him.
We can allow our past to be told by our oppres­sors which in turn dic­tate our future , essen­tial­ly acqui­esc­ing to (his-sto­ry).
Or we may edu­cate our­selves about our his­to­ry, and decide our own future.
The American black is cow­ard­ly and feckless . 
His strength is used for bring­ing harm to his sis­ters and brothers.
When it’s time to stand with those who look out for his inter­est he is large­ly absent.
How can you be a racist if you talk about the pogrom, arguably the worst human atroc­i­ty ever to be vis­it­ed on a race of peo­ple by anoth­er race?
Why would you allow your­self to be cowed , or con­trolled by the sons and daugh­ters of those who raped and mur­dered your fore-parents?
People who stand by as their police slaugh­ter your children.
People who go into vot­ing booths and elect reac­tionar­ies who are ded­i­cat­ed to your demise.

If the life you live is for your­self it is a wast­ed life.
It is even worse if the life you live is one based on enter­tain­ment and las­civ­i­ous vices, a life which is out of touch with hap­pen­ings around you.
If you do not decide , oth­ers will decide for you.
There are no short­age of self hat­ing blacks who are quite con­tent to be sec­ond class cit­i­zens despite lofty perch­es in American society .
Their perch­es range from the Supreme Court, to the halls of Congress , from Hospital emer­gency rooms to police departments. 
Prized Negros have con­sumed the drug of grad­u­al­ism Dr King spoke about. The drug Malcolm had no patience for.
Go along to get along is a pre­scrip­tion for con­tin­ued sec­ond-class citizenship.
Black peo­ple must rise up and take respon­si­bil­i­ty for their coun­try, this coun­try they call America. 
This coun­try the European American claim as the coun­try their fore-par­ents built.
With no men­tion or appre­ci­a­tion for the blood, sweat and agony of our fore-par­ents, mil­lions of who died so this coun­try could take on life.

Why do you care what your ene­my think about you?
Any non-black opposed to your right to dig­ni­ty, respect and full cit­i­zen­ship is an enemy. 
Therefore he does not count , his opin­ion does not matter.
Why do you sit idly and uni­formed while he sends his chil­dren to good schools.
His chil­dren are not harassed and killed by police.
His is white privilege.
He has priv­i­lege because you don’t, that’s why it’s called privilege.
[Privilege] “a spe­cial right, advan­tage, or immu­ni­ty grant­ed or avail­able only to a par­tic­u­lar per­son or group of people”.
If your white friend do not want you to have it , con­sid­er your choice of friends or your under­stand­ing of friendship.
Throughout the sojourn of this exper­i­ment good peo­ple, black and white have strug­gled and died because of their desire to see all peo­ple live in peace and with dignity.
Not all white peo­ple are ene­mies of our race, of our people.
Let us embrace those who share in our struggle,those who stand with us, even as we con­front those who would do us harm.

President Obama said he is embar­rased for the 47 Republican Senators and oth­ers who sent a let­ter to Iran, indi­cat­ing to that Nation that what­ev­er deal the Administration and oth­er pow­ers arrive at would pre­sum­ably be an exec­u­tive deal sub­ject to change by the next President.
The pres­i­dent made the com­ments in a trail­er for a Vice News inter­view sched­uled to run in full on Monday, accord­ing to (Politico).

“I’m embar­rassed for them. For them to address a let­ter to the Ayatollah who they claim is our mor­tal ene­my, and their basic argu­ment to them is ‘don’t deal with our pres­i­dent ‘cause you can’t trust him to fol­low through on agree­ment,” Obama said in a trail­er for a Vice News inter­view sched­uled to run in full on Monday. “That’s close to unprecedented,”
Germany’s for­eign min­is­ter weighed in Thursday, say­ing that to call the let­ter unhelp­ful would be “an understatement.”
What’s even more nau­se­at­ing is that they can­not come up with a plau­si­ble expla­na­tion for their actions that would sway any­one to con­clude that their actions are any­thing but racial.
John McCain the elder state­ment of being per­pet­u­al­ly wrong and one of the sig­na­to­ry of the let­ter said.
“It was kind of a very rapid process. Everybody was look­ing for­ward to get­ting out of town because of the snow­storm, I think we prob­a­bly should have had more dis­cus­sion about it, giv­en the blow-back that there is.”

In oth­er words he is only con­cerned about the blow­back , and not (1)that he did not take time to con­sid­er the con­se­quences to his and his col­leagues actions, and (2) That his actions would be unprece­dent­ed and wrong but could be con­sid­ered to be bor­der­line trea­so­nous as the New York Daily News and peo­ple all across the Globe believe.
This is the same John McCain who burst into bomb, bomb bomb Iran song when he ran against Obama in 08 and the ques­tion of Iran came up.
Despite the hys­te­ria of McCain and the more rabid war­mon­gers on the right sur­round­ing Iran’s sup­posed march toward a nuclear bomb, there is no evi­dence Iran has a bomb or is active­ly seek­ing to devel­op nuclear weapons.

These were the same peo­ple who lied to the world using maps and sup­posed satel­lite imagery to con­vince many goats[sic] that Iraq pos­sessed dan­ger­ous weapons which were capa­ble of destroy­ing their Ally Israel and destroy­ing the world.
Israel is still where it was , the world is still here, and the Goats who fell for that malarkey now know that it was all a lie.
AS FOR CLAIMS OF TREASON

The Logan Act a law dat­ing to 1799 pro­hibit­ing unau­tho­rized cit­i­zens from nego­ti­at­ing with for­eign gov­ern­ments dur­ing a dis­pute with the United States. The law was a response to the actions of George Logan, a physi­cian and zeal­ous Republican from Pennsylvania, who under­took a lone voy­age to Paris in an effort to nego­ti­ate an end to the Quasi-War with France. Logan had no offi­cial stand­ing or stature, and his pri­vate diplo­ma­cy stoked Federalist fears of a wide­spread plot among Republicans (as mem­bers of the Jeffersonian par­ty, also known as the Democratic-Republican par­ty, called them­selves) to sub­vert the elect­ed gov­ern­ment in Philadelphia. Ironically, Logan was nev­er pros­e­cut­ed under his name­sake fed­er­al law — quite the con­trary: He was elect­ed to the Senate in 1800.
These Senators had no Authority to nego­ti­ate with Iran, yet they will not be pros­e­cut­ed for their actions. It is impor­tant to note that this is irony full circle.
Logan was not pros­e­cut­ed , nei­ther will these 47 Republicans.
Which caus­es me to won­der why is Edward Snowden in hid­ing when these 47 are not?

Despite my dis­gust at these Republicans , I still have a prob­lem with way the President sees this.
Quote: For them to address a let­ter to the Ayatollah who they claim is our mor­tal ene­my, and their basic argu­ment to them is ‘don’t deal with our pres­i­dent ‘cause you can’t trust him to fol­low through on agreement,”
Mister President I dis­agree with you, at least on the way you per­ceive this
They are not say­ing that you can­not be trust­ed to deliv­er on what­ev­er deal you make strike with the Iranians. They are telling the Iranians that you basi­cal­ly have no author­i­ty to deliv­er on any deal they can­not wipe away.
Yes it is unprecedented.
Some say it is Treasonous.
No one will be pros­e­cut­ed, if a poor per­son had done any­thing remote­ly sim­i­lar to what these Senators did all of these hyp­ocrites, not just the 47 Senators who signed the let­ter, but those poten­tial­ly run­ning for the Republican nom­i­na­tion would be on tele­vi­sion call­ing for that per­son­’s head as they did Snowden.

If Democrats had done that to a sit­ting Republican pres­i­dent, repub­li­cans would ham­mer them for it for decades. There would be hear­ings and more hearings.
They are a despi­ca­ble set of hyp­ocrites who are not averse to spend­ing tens of mil­lions of tax pay­ers dol­lars to unearth noth­ing as they did with Special Prosecutor Kenneth Star dur­ing the Clinton years.
Or the non­sen­si­cal pur­suit of noth­ing as a result of the unfor­tu­nate Benghazi incident.
What con­tin­ues to be clear, is the lev­el of idio­cy and racism inher­ent in vot­ers who con­tin­ue to elect the likes of Cotton, Cruz, Rubio, Pense, Lee, etal.
It does seem that when one exam­ines the views of those elect­ed to office in the Republican par­ty, it is clear that this coun­try has not made much stride, con­trary to what the President believes.

As a kid I got into fights occa­sion­al­ly , it’s prob­a­bly safe to say most if not all kids get into fights now and then, it’s as if fight­ing is a right of passage.
What hap­pened in that Brooklyn McDonalds recent­ly was not a fight. 
It was anoth­er instance of what has been hap­pen­ing all across America late­ly, sheer barbarism.
Aniah Ferguson, 16, and oth­ers pum­meled a  15-year-old girl until she went limp on the floor even then Ferguson con­tin­ued to kick the wound­ed girl while scores of oth­ers howled in delight or par­tic­i­pat­ed in the assault.

This was not white on black, this was black on black, a sce­nario which plays out in black com­mu­ni­ties all across America dai­ly result­ing in death and mas­sive injuries.

In fair­ness, this bar­barism is not con­fined to the slaugh­ter which occur on the streets of Detroit Michigan, Chicago Illinois, Camden New Jersey or any oth­er city for that matter.
It includes packs of young black men and women engag­ing in what are called flash robberies.
This is a kind of Robbery where gangs of young peo­ple run into busi­ness-places and grab what they want, dam­age the busi­ness estab­lish­ment then leave quick­ly before author­i­ties arrive.

It is no won­der then that they turn on each oth­er when they can­not find oth­ers to victimize.
These are truths from which we can­not afford to turn our back.
At a time when we are wit­ness­ing raw and some­times unpro­voked and even unwar­rant­ed aggres­sion from law-enforce­ment, the behav­ior of these young peo­ple does noth­ing to help the case against law-enforce­ment excess.

In fact those with big­ot­ed agen­das point to these occur­rences as rea­son for more law enforce­ment aggression.
We must begin then to look at what is going on with­in the black home that is fuel­ing this kind of behavior.
The moth­er of 16-year-old Aniah Ferguson report­ed­ly said she did not raise her daugh­ter to act in that way. 
Notwithstanding Ferguson is already a moth­er to a one-year-old baby, and a mem­ber of a gang called the young sav­ages, pros­e­cu­tors claim.
How is that for perspective.
Which leaves us to won­der what are the under­ly­ing psy­cho­log­i­cal issues at play which caus­es not just this young lady who by the way has an exten­sive rap sheet to act this way, but the tens of thou­sands of oth­er black teens and young adults who think this is accept­able behavior.

I don’t want to hear that not only black peo­ple act that way.
It does­n’t mat­ter who else acts that way it does not make it right or acceptable.
Secondly it is up to us to fix our house not the oth­er guy’s house.

When some of us with­in the black com­mu­ni­ty dare to speak out at the cri­sis of unwed moth­ers hav­ing babies, some with­in the com­mu­ni­ty take issue with our criticism.
We hear all kinds of kook-like expla­na­tions for the rea­sons why black America is in deep crisis.
Recently CNN’ Don Lemon point­ed to the fact that over 70% of black babies are born out of wedlock.
Lemon was round­ly con­demned for point­ing to what is a fact.
Does run­ning from the num­bers, make them any less true?
“If Lemon real­ly want­ed to help the black com­mu­ni­ty, he could start by adopt­ing a deep­er under­stand­ing of the his­to­ry, soci­ol­o­gy and psy­chol­o­gy of his own peo­ple,” wrote Washington Post blog­ger Rahiel Tesfamariam. “Offering made-for-TV analy­sis about deeply com­plex social issues in the man­ner in which he did is irre­spon­si­ble and lacks intel­lec­tu­al rigor.”
Clearly when you have apol­o­gists like Rahiel Tesfamariam com­ing up with smart sound­ing goobly-gook, it is no won­der many with­in our com­mu­ni­ty take com­fort in victimhood.
Even as Rahiel Tesfamariam accus­es Lemon of a lack of intel­lec­tu­al rig­or, he engages in what could be con­strued to be intel­lec­tu­al dis­hon­esty or at best Intellectual elitism.
Maybe Rahiel Tesfamariam is quite hap­py that there are peo­ple that oth­ers like him­self look down on.
http://​www​.poli​ti​fact​.com/​t​r​u​t​h​-​o​-​m​e​t​e​r​/​s​t​a​t​e​m​e​n​t​s​/​2​0​1​3​/​j​u​l​/​2​9​/​d​o​n​-​l​e​m​o​n​/​c​n​n​s​-​d​o​n​-​l​e​m​o​n​-​s​a​y​s​-​m​o​r​e​-​7​2​-​p​e​r​c​e​n​t​-​a​f​r​i​c​a​n​-​a​m​e​r​i​ca/

Frankly you know you have a prob­lem when even those who hate you tell you what ails you.
We can no longer accept the tran­quil drug of ratio­nal­iz­ing. We can­not con­tin­ue to nuance our response to events which war­rants no spec­u­la­tion ratio­nal­iza­tion or nuancing.

We must take respon­si­bil­i­ty for our children.
We can­not con­tin­ue to believe the lie that hav­ing chil­dren at the ten­der age of 15 is okay . It isn’t.
We can­not con­tin­ue to invent rea­sons why 12, 13, and 15 year-old kids are hav­ing babies.
It is a fail­ure of parenting.
It is a fail­ure of under­stand­ing that each house­hold which con­tributes to this enig­ma of teen birth out of wed­lock is con­tribut­ing to the blight of the entire com­mu­ni­ty and maybe our entire existence.
Who in their right mind expect that when 71% of all babies born in the African-American com­mu­ni­ty are born to unwed moth­ers, that there are not seri­ous con­se­quences for those statistics?

Who does­n’t both­er to rec­og­nize that the epi­dem­ic of unwed birth has become a pro­duc­tion line for the prison indus­tri­al complex.
And no, it does not mat­ter in this con­text that not all end up in prison.
If one does it is one too many.
The fact is that the vast major­i­ty do end up in the crim­i­nal jus­tice system.
Is it dis­re­spect­ful or dis­loy­al to point out that we are direct­ly con­tribut­ing to some of the prob­lems plagu­ing our community?
Is it rea­son­able for us to demand oth­ers show us respect, when we act like rav­en­ous Wolves tear­ing away at the car­cass­es of each other?

We can only tru­ly expect respect when we act respectful.
Not for any­one else but for our own selves.
For our own dignity.
For our own survival.

Forty (47) Republicans Senators attached their sig­na­ture to a Letter which they sent to the Iranian Government.
The gist of the mes­sage to the Iranian Government is that what­ev­er deal President Obama (America’s sit­ting President and com­man­der in chief) strikes with them, can and may be wiped away after the pres­i­dent demit office.
Please take a moment to absorb , and assim­i­late the impact and the pos­si­ble con­se­quences of this unprece­dent­ed move.
Pundits and his­to­ri­ans alike have stat­ed there is no prece­dent for this.
Some argue this bor­ders on treason.
Never before in the his­to­ry of the Republic , his­to­ri­ans lament, has the con­gress or parts of it,ever attempt­ed to usurp the author­i­ty of the President in this way much less on for­eign affairs.

Former Democratic Senator and pres­i­den­tial front run­ner Hillary Clinton said quote<“one has to ask, what was the pur­pose of this let­ter?

“There appear to be two log­i­cal answers,” Clinton said. “Either these sen­a­tors were try­ing to be help­ful to the Iranians or harm­ful to the com­man­der-in-chief in the midst of high-stakes inter­na­tion­al diplo­ma­cy. Either answer does dis­cred­it to the let­ter’s signatories.”

Well Hillary, this is not the first time they have been dis­re­spect­ful or tried to under­mine this President . Remember Joe Wilson’s “You lie”?
Since then it has been inces­sant, just recent­ly Boehner invit­ed Israel’s prime min­is­ter Benjamin Netanyahu to use the US house of Representatives to blast the Iran pol­i­cy of the sit­ting President.
So there is prece­dent for their behavior.
They would rather col­lude with a for­eign pow­er against this President, that try to find com­mon ground toward secur­ing America’s future, and the future of the planet.
Which means they col­lude against their own country.
I am not a Lawyer, and cer­tain­ly not a Constitutional lawyer by any stretch , but if it looks like treason,smells like trea­son behaves like trea­son, oh well.….…..

President Barack Obama slammed the let­ter on Monday, accus­ing the GOP of mak­ing “com­mon cause with the hard-lin­ers in Iran” by attempt­ing to under­cut ongo­ing nego­ti­a­tions that face a first dead­line for a frame­work agree­ment at the end of the month.

The Republican point man on this lat­est affront to Presidential author­i­ty is Arkansas fresh­man sen­a­tor Tom Cotton. The fact that Cotton would be point man on this is even more unprece­dent­ed. According to sen­ate tra­di­tions Cotton who just took the oath has­n’t even fig­ured out his way around the sen­ate build­ing yet, much less to have inject­ed him­self into inter­na­tion­al nego­ti­a­tions, par­tic­u­lar­ly one this del­i­cate and one which real­ly is the purview of the President.

Only Seven Republican Senators did not sign Cotton’s let­ter to the Mullahs. They are Sens. Jeff Flake, Lisa Murkowski, Lamar Alexander, Dan Coats, Thad Cochran, Susan Collins and Bob Corker.
Guaranteed each had their own self serv­ing rea­son not to, which did not include their alle­giance to the Republic.

Under pres­sure to explain his unprece­dent­ed actions Cotton insist­ed there was noth­ing unprece­dent­ed about what they did, argu­ing that the let­ter was not intend­ed as a par­ti­san move and was instead aimed at keep­ing the U.S. from reach­ing a bad and “dan­ger­ous” deal.

“This let­ter is about stop­ping Iran from get­ting a nuclear deal,” Cotton said. “One way that we make sure that we get a bet­ter deal is that we stand strong.”
Here’s the hypocrisy of Cotton and repub­li­cans, if they want­ed to stand strong they would do so stand­ing with the Commander in chief of their coun­try and the oth­er Nuclear armed pow­ers behind the deal being worked out with Iran. They would stand as Democrats did with George Bush after the events of September 11^th 2001.
It is not unusu­al for the Political par­ties in this coun­try to be con­tentious. It is also not out of the ordi­nary that there are grave and seri­ous dif­fer­ences when issues of seri­ous import are being con­sid­ered. Never for­get this coun­try fought a civ­il war to decide its way forward.
What is out of the ordi­nary is that Americans would give aid and com­fort to oth­er pow­ers rather than sup­port their own twice elect­ed leader.

You do not stand strong by telling a for­eign pow­er that you are against your own leader.
That is not patri­o­tism, there are oth­er names for that kind of action, and they are not sim­i­lar in mean­ing to patriotism.
Cotton is a for­mer sol­dier and a Harvard edu­cat­ed lawyer. He is also a right-wing hawk who wants war. Republicans want war with Iran.
Expect that there will be far worse than Netanyahu’s speech and Cotton’s let­ter, they will not stop until they get anoth­er war with anoth­er mid­dle east­ern country.

Their goal is to neu­tral­ize any coun­try in that region that has the gall to stand up to the nuclear armed apartheid bas­tion of white suprema­cy we now know as Israel.
Obama will not insti­gate a war against Iran and that makes Obama dan­ger­ous. Waging war against Iraq using lies and dis­tor­tions was not enough. The con­se­quences of Republican lies and decep­tion result­ed in the cre­ation of ISIS and has rad­i­cal­ized young men across the Globe.
They see America as wag­ing war against Islam. President Obama who thank­ful­ly have seen the World out­side as com­pared to his Republican coun­ter­parts , some of whom have nev­er seen any­one out­side their coun­ty of birth,refuses to fall into that trap of mak­ing it seem that America is wag­ing a chris­t­ian cru­sade against Islam.
And for that the idi­ot­ic and idi­ot­ic repub­li­cans crit­i­cize him.

During the American Civil War Lincoln did not want to free the slaves, con­trary to what you hear today. Lincoln was a slave owner.
Eventually Lincoln had to make the war about some­thing big­ger that him­self, even big­ger than the Union.
There need­ed to be a high­er moral argu­ment for this war…
Lincoln signed the Emancipation declaration.
Not because he was a man of high moral con­vic­tion on the issue of slav­ery as some revi­s­i­tion­ist his­to­ri­an would have you believe.
Lincoln need­ed men to fight, he need­ed a grand idea on which to ral­ly the Union, he also need­ed to pre­vent the French from com­ing in, in defense of it’s Louisiana territory.
It was the moral and right thing for Lincoln to do, the North won the war and the Union survived.
Obama under­stands the con­se­quences of the per­cep­tion of an American cru­sade against Islam, and is doing his lev­el best to avoid that perception.
Unfortunately that lev­el of com­pre­hen­sion can­not be expect­ed from the racist bunch of white suprema­cists which is now the Republican party.

Even those who have seen com­bat, Cotton included,and the car­nage of war, are in no way dis­suad­ed from the fal­la­cy and coun­ter­pro­duc­tive nature of con­stant­ly man­u­fac­tur­ing new enemies.
Instead they con­vince them­selves that brute-force and heavy hand­ed­ness are appro­pri­ate tools in deal­ing with Sovereign powers.
Then they wring their hands and won­der whats behind the think­ing of young peo­ple who head to Syria and Iraq to fight along­side ISIS.

SELMA 50 YEARS LATER

It is inter­est­ing to note that not one of these racist war mon­gers who signed Cotton’s let­ter to Iran both­ered to show up in Selma Alabama to com­mem­o­rate the 50^th Anniversary of the march across the Edmund Pettus bridge.
Black America’s tri­umphant march across that bridge was sym­bol­ic of more them pre­vail­ing against the raw big­otry of Racist oppression.
They braved bil­ly-clubs, dogs and bul­lets know­ing they were writ­ing the indeli­ble sto­ry of America. The America which still, is an evolv­ing saga yet to be completed.
They had their heads bashed in , bones splin­tered ‚flesh gnarled by vis­cous dogs, because they believed in the phrase ” all men are cre­at­ed equal” and that they too deserve to live as equal men on this land blacks occu­pied before Europeans real­ized the world was not flat.
The big­otry and racism of 1965 has not died or gone away , it dwells just below the sur­face, forced there by strong Federal laws which guar­an­teed that peo­ple were not to be imped­ed when they want­ed to vote.
Laws which guar­an­teed that all Americans , regard­less of race, class, or creed, reli­gious or sex­u­al per­sua­sion should be able to study in the same schools.
Yet the very insti­tu­tion charged with the sacred trust of pro­tect­ing the fun­da­men­tal rights of all the peo­ple is the very insti­tu­tion tear­ing away at the fab­ric of the vot­ing rights act and the right for peo­ple to go to school where they please and con­gre­gate where they please.

When our President speak of the America of his dreams with euphor­ic ora­to­ry and bril­liance, I shud­der to think of what America will be under the likes of Ted Cruz, Tom Cotton, Marco Rubio, and others.
We may hide our heads in the sand and pre­tend all is well, or we may con­front the real­i­ty of what those like Cotton and his band of 46 dim-wits mean. These are elect­ed offi­cials who hold high office, yet they sys­tem­at­i­cal­ly missed, or chose to miss that whether they like it or not the African-American sto­ry is the sto­ry of America.
Choosing to stay away makes it clear they do not care to respect, rep­re­sent, or relate the black sto­ry, America’s story.
By so doing they have cast them­selves as incon­se­quen­tial foot­notes in the dust-bin of his­to­ry. Rendering them­selves and their par­ty incon­se­quen­tial to the con­ver­sa­tion going forward.
By turn­ing their backs on black America they turned their backs on America.
By turn­ing to Netanyahu and Iran they declared their das­tard­ly dis­loy­al­ty to America in no uncer­tain terms.
That my friends is what the Republican par­ty has become.
An inter­na­tion­al disgrace.….….

“I deeply regret that some per­ceive my being here as polit­i­cal. That was nev­er my inten­tion,” Netanyahu said in an address before Congress. “I know that no mat­ter on which side of the aisle you sit, you stand with Israel.”
“Don’t be fooled – the bat­tle between Iran and ISIS doesn’t turn Iran into a friend for America; Iran and ISIS are com­pet­ing for the crown of mil­i­tant Islam,” said Netanyahu. The prob­lem with America’s poten­tial deal with Iran is twofold, said the Israeli leader. “The first major con­ces­sion,” he said, is that it “would leave Iran with a vast nuclear infra­struc­ture.” Second, he con­tin­ued, the restric­tions imposed on Iran’s nuclear pro­gram would not effec­tive­ly bar vio­la­tions. “Iran has proven time and again that it can­not be trust­ed,” said Netanyahu. “That’s why this deal is so bad – it doesn’t block Iran’s path to the bomb; it paves Iran’s path to the bomb.”

President Obama said there was noth­ing new in the speech deliv­ered before the American Congress by the Republican Senator from Israel. President 
Obama, mean­while told reporters lat­er in the day that he read the tran­script of Netanyahu’s speech and found “noth­ing new.” He not­ed that the Israeli leader did not offer any “viable alter­na­tives” to pre­vent­ing Iran from obtain­ing a nuclear weapon, and defend­ed his administration’s pur­suit of a nuclear deal with the Middle Eastern country.
Does it seem strange that a President, any pres­i­dent, would be forced to defend his poli­cies as the duly twice elect­ed head of his coun­try, while a for­eign leader attacks his poli­cies in his coun­try’s high­est leg­isla­tive body, as that leader vis­its, all unbe­knownst to him ?
I digress, maybe it’s just me.….

“[A]s one who val­ues the U.S.-Israel rela­tion­ship, and loves Israel, I was near tears through­out the Prime Minister’s speech – sad­dened by the insult to the intel­li­gence of the United States as part of the P5+1 nations, and sad­dened by the con­de­scen­sion toward our knowl­edge of the threat posed by Iran and our broad­er com­mit­ment to pre­vent­ing nuclear pro­lif­er­a­tion,” said Pelosi in a statement.

No Republican would have sat through a con­tro­ver­sial speech giv­en by a for­eign leader when a Republican President in the White Hose was not noti­fied that that for­eign leader would be invit­ed to address the coun­try and con­gress. On that basis the com­ments of Pelosi is incon­se­quen­tial and has no bear­ing, it should not be con­sid­ered. Any Democrat Jew or not, who attend­ed that speech is dis­loy­al to the President and should hang their heads in shame, they are all a disgrace.

Netanyahu wants war.
As President Obama stat­ed there was noth­ing new in the speech. We have all heard Netanyahu’s drum­beat for war against Iran before. If Netanyahu did not prof­fer any­thing new what is the rea­son for the speech ?
As Pelosi lament­ed qoute,“I was near tears through­out the Prime Minister’s speech – sad­dened by the insult to the intel­li­gence of the United States as part of the P5+1 nations, and sad­dened by the con­de­scen­sion toward our knowl­edge of the threat posed by Iran and our broad­er com­mit­ment to pre­vent­ing nuclear proliferation”.
Well why would he not be condescending? 
He was brought in with­out the knowl­edge of the sit­ting President and Commander-in-chief, to chal­lenge the President and oth­er nation’s lead­ers work toward a peace­ful set­tle­ment to the per­ceived prob­lem of Iran’s nuclear program.

Simply put Netanyahu is a war-mon­ger, if he was to be believed the World would have come to an end years ago based on his pre­dic­tions on Iran’s intentions. 
Netanyahu did not offer any­thing new, because he has noth­ing new. He wants war but he wants America to fight that war with Iran, and he wants American sol­diers to die so he can have hege­mo­ny in the region. 
Republican war-mon­gers do not mind get­ting into a war with Iran , which by the way would be a grave mis­take. Their only prob­lem is that there is only one Commander-in-chief at a time. 
So it seem that the strat­e­gy is to paint Obama as a weak President who is actu­al­ly paving the way for Iran acquir­ing a nuclear bomb, even as he speaks niceties about the pres­i­dent from the cor­ner of his mouth.

ISIS is not a reli­gious group of Muslim fun­da­men­tal­ists, they are a bunch of mur­der­ous sav­ages. Netanyahu does not mind play­ing up the ISIS threat to get what he wants. What Netanyahu and his sup­port­ers will not say is that some sup­posed lead­ers of ISIS have been revealed to be Jewish oper­a­tives pre­tend­ing to be Arabs.
Those who want to bomb oth­er nations must avail them­selves to the duplic­i­tous canard being fed the world by Netanyahu. Ask the Palestinian peo­ple who live under the boot-heels of Israeli occu­pa­tion. However none of that mat­ters, even as the sin­gu­lar largest issue at the cen­ter of most con­flicts in the mid­dle east, is Israel’s occu­pa­tion of Palestine.
The fact is that Netanyahu knows that come what may , America will con­tin­ue to sup­port the nuclear armed Israel. In fact he bragged about it in his speech, quote,” “I deeply regret that some per­ceive my being here as polit­i­cal, that was nev­er my inten­tion, I know that no mat­ter on which side of the aisle you sit, you stand with Israel.” There you have it, no mat­ter what President is in the White House Jewish mon­ey will ensure that he stays in line and do the bid­ding of Israel.

Many peo­ple in the state of Israel dis­agrees with Netanyahu’s inces­sant drum-beat for war. A large per­cent­age of Israeli’s also dis­agree with Israel’s treat­ment of the Palestinian peo­ple. So too do they dis­agree with the idea that Israeli should be at war with Iran.
Netanyahu wants war with Iran just on American dime and with American blood.
The war­mon­ger­ing clowns on the right are too stu­pid to fig­ure it out.
Israeli’s going to the polls in two weeks can show Netanyahu the door, that is their best hope for peace.

Despite mas­sive street protest and retal­ia­to­ry vio­lence against Police in 2014 the rash of police killing of unarmed civil­ians con­tin­ue unabated.

Jan.23^rd , 2015 .-An Oklahoma cop wear­ing a body cam record­ed him­self shoot­ing and killing a man who was run­ning from him after the sus­pect stopped to pick up an object he had dropped dur­ing the pur­suit before con­tin­u­ing fleeing.

PASCO, Wash. — Residents angry that police shot and killed an orchard work­er accused of throw­ing rocks at offi­cers are plan­ning more protests in an agri­cul­tur­al area of south­east­ern Washington. Some of the dozens of peo­ple who saw the shoot­ing at a busy inter­sec­tion Tuesday evening video­taped the con­fronta­tion in Pasco, a city of about 68,000 peo­ple where more than half the res­i­dents are Hispanic.

March2nd 2015 .-Three Los Angeles police offi­cers fired at and killed a man on the city’s Skid Row dur­ing a strug­gle over one of the offi­cers’ guns, and author­i­ties said they planned to use video cap­tured by a bystander in their investigation.

The killings hap­pen almost dai­ly, yet Authorities turn a blind eye to what is clear­ly a pan­dem­ic of exces­sive police use of force. In shoot­ing after shoot­ing, police brass declare that the shoot­ings are jus­ti­fied and done with­ing police use of force guidelines.
Politicians jump on the police band-wag­on and declare that they stand with police , even when the actions of police are clear­ly beyond the pale.
Those who do not auto­mat­i­cal­ly default toward the police, remain in duplic­i­tous silence. New York’s Governor Andrew Cuomo read­i­ly comes to mind.

So what is behind the con­tin­ued and unabat­ed killing by police, despite nation-wide protest? The answer is sim­ple. They are not being held account­able. In some cas­es the killings don’t even make sense.
A for­mer Florida A&M foot­ball play­er was shot and killed as he approached police offi­cers, look­ing for assis­tance after get­ting into a car accident.
Jonathan Ferrell, 24, crashed his car ear­ly one Saturday morn­ing, and approached a home, look­ing for help. The res­i­dents, unsure of who was out­side, called the police. When the offi­cers arrived, Ferell ran towards them, only to be shot sev­er­al times. Ferell, who might have been bad­ly shak­en up by the acci­dent, died on the scene.
Police said in a state­ment. “Our inves­ti­ga­tion has shown that Officer Kerrick did not have a law­ful right to dis­charge his weapon dur­ing this encounter. ”
How does a man get killed run­ning toward the peo­ple who are paid hand­some­ly to pro­tect and pro­vide help?
As I have said it is becom­ing increas­ing­ly evi­dent that the police have no inter­est in serv­ing cer­tain seg­ments of the pub­lic. In most if not all cas­es where exces­sive lethal force was employed the vic­tim is black or brown and the cop is white.

If as police say when these shoot­ings occur , that “offi­cers fol­lowed pro­ce­dure” then the pub­lic must be told that the police have a right to kill you whether you are armed or not. The cop only need to say he/​she was in fear for his/​her life and that fear is no longer based on rea­son­able­ness , but is total­ly left up to the poten­tial­ly irra­tional mind of the cop.

As a police offi­cer I would nev­er con­tem­plate un-hol­ster­ing my weapon to sub­due a sin­gle unarmed indi­vid­ual if I was in the com­pa­ny of one or more officers.
How four offi­cers end up using lethal force on one unarmed indi­vid­ual is galling , uncon­scionable and frightening.
What is even more fright­en­ing is the cal­lous dis­patch with which peo­ple deal with these wan­ton acts of mur­der because the vic­tims do not look like them nor live like them.
Have the police now become exter­mi­na­tors of those soci­ety deem disposable?
If so who are the dis­pos­able dregs and who decide when they die?
It is incred­i­bly scary that so many cit­i­zens unwit­ting­ly cede their free­doms to the state, through their cold uncar­ing dis­re­gard for oth­ers they deem less than them or other.

Police offi­cers are issued batons, taz­ers, pep­per-spray, hand-cuffs, and yes guns.The Gun was sup­posed to be the last weapon an offi­cer uses.
It’s use has always been con­tin­gent on the life of the offi­cer or that of anoth­er being in immi­nent dan­ger. The threat to life and limb was once sup­posed to be real and rea­son­able. It was nev­er sup­posed to be con­coct­ed or contrived.

Today cops tell cit­i­zens I will F*****g shoot you as they walk up to them, they then make good on their threats and they are not held accountable.
These are the new real­i­ties, the rules have changed and nobody both­ered to tell us.
Welcome to the new world order.

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is not even mak­ing an attempt to respect American President Obama and his administration.
The New York Daily News report­ed that Sens. Dick Durbin, D‑Ill., and Dianne Feinstein, D‑Calif., on Monday invit­ed Netanyahu to meet in a closed-door ses­sion with Democrats dur­ing his vis­it. He declined the invi­ta­tion on Tuesday and expressed regret about the polit­i­cal­ly fraught tone of his trip.

“I regret that the invi­ta­tion to address the spe­cial joint ses­sion of Congress has been per­ceived by some to be polit­i­cal or par­ti­san,” Netanyahu wrote. “I can assure you that my sole inten­tion in accept­ing it was to voice Israel’s grave con­cerns about a poten­tial nuclear agree­ment with Iran that could threat­en the sur­vival of my country.”

Who are the “some” of whom Netanyahu speak is it the President? The President has said he will not meet with Netanyahu because it would be a break with tra­di­tion of the white house not to meet with for­eign lead­ers who are engaged in elec­tion cam­paign­ing. Netanyahu faces the Israeli elec­torate in just a cou­ple of weeks from his sched­uled March 3^rd address.

Frankly President Obama should stop beat­ing around the bush and tell the world he refus­es to meet with the dis­re­spect­ful Republican Senator from Israel because he does not like him. Netanyahu all but endorsed Mitt Romney for President dur­ing the last Presidential elec­tions . Who is Netanyahu fool­ing , he does not like Obama and Obama does not like him . 

The report went on to say more than a half dozen House and Senate Democrats have said they will skip the speech, call­ing it an affront to President Barack Obama and the admin­is­tra­tion as they engage in high-lev­el nego­ti­a­tions with Iran over its nuclear pro­gram. Vice President Joe Biden will be trav­el­ing and has no plans to attend the speech.
Well there you have it, half a dozen house and sen­ate democ­rats? What of the rest? Not only is this address a deeply offen­sive breach of pro­to­col, it is an affront to the Nation’s first black pres­i­dent. Democrats who make the deci­sion to sit through this affront will sig­nal that they join repub­li­cans in giv­ing aid and com­fort to the inso­lent Netanyahu over a sit­ting American pres­i­dent who just hap­pens to be black.

Israel is an apartheid state which has pre­cious lit­tle respect for black people.
Netanyahu and his admin­is­tra­tion has led a vicious cam­paign against Ethiopian Jews and and oth­er Africans who ven­ture into the state of Israel. Netanyahu and many in his Government and Country labels blacks who ven­ture into Apartheid Israel “Infiltrators”. They call them can­cers on Israeli society.
Many African Jews,(real decen­dants of bib­li­cal jews) are harassed and round­ed up like cat­tle and herd­ed into a mas­sive prison in the Negev desert. 
Why would a repub­li­can sup­port­ing Netanyahu respect our pres­i­dent, when he sees Africans in Israel as infiltrators? 

The trav­es­ty of the blind sup­port some have for the Apartheid state of Israel, includ­ing some reli­gious lead­ers in the black com­mu­ni­ty, is their igno­rance to the real­i­ties of the Biblical Israel and this char­la­tan Apartheid state.
The tragedy is that even though they hate blacks , they ben­e­fit from black peo­ple’s mon­ey the American Government takes in tax­es and gives to them to the tune of Billions of dol­lars annually.

Durbin said in a state­ment that he regret­ted that Netanyahu could not meet with the Democrats.

“We offered the Prime Minister an oppor­tu­ni­ty to bal­ance the polit­i­cal­ly divi­sive invi­ta­tion from Speaker (John) Boehner with a pri­vate meet­ing with Democrats who are com­mit­ted to keep­ing the bipar­ti­san sup­port of Israel strong,” Durbin said. “His refusal to meet is dis­ap­point­ing to those of us who have stood by Israel for decades.

Well there you have it, Netanyahu is not a diplo­mat, he is not a man who respects pro­to­cols. He is a war-mon­ger­ing hawk who will not rest until America is engaged in a war with Iran over nuclear weapons even as Israel pos­s­eses stock­piles of nuclear weapons of it’s own.
What makes Israel exempt from the same rules oth­er coun­tries are sub­ject to?
Who does Netanyahu think he is that President Obama should bow to his demands for war, fail­ing which he will protest the President’s poli­cies using the con­gress as a polit­i­cal platform?
This is the kind of raw dis­re­spect that we have come to expect from repub­li­cans in the congress. 
Hiding our heads in the sand does not negate the fact that con­gres­sion­al repub­li­cans want war with Iran. Netanyahu also want war with Iran.

This pres­i­den­t’s pol­i­cy of peace through nego­ti­a­tions and mutu­al respect, does not line up with the per­pet­u­al war-mon­ger­ing of repub­li­cans and Netanyahu.
This is the rea­son the weak John Boehner invit­ed Netanyahu to speak .
Never before have we seen such egre­gious dis­play of dis­re­spect to pres­i­den­tial lead­er­ship. We will wait to see which demo­c­rat sit and lis­ten to Netanyahu’s bull.

Rudolph Giuliani the man some dubbed America’s may­or dou­bled down on the inflam­ma­to­ry com­ment he made about the nation’s pres­i­dent not lov­ing America as oth­ers do.
On the face of it, the pub­lic­i­ty-hound Giuliani would have to have some sort of access to the brain of all Americans in order to mea­sure their degree of love of country.
There is no need to guess about the method Giuliani used in arriv­ing at the President’s patri­o­tism lev­els, he spelled it out when he made it clear he was not sor­ry about mak­ing an ass of himself.

“Look, this man was brought up basi­cal­ly in a white fam­i­ly, so what­ev­er he learned or didn’t learn, I attribute this more to the influ­ence of com­mu­nism and social­ism” than to his race, Giuliani told the Daily News. “I don’t (see) this President as being par­tic­u­lar­ly a prod­uct of African-American soci­ety or some­thing like that. He isn’t,” the for­mer may­or added. “Logically, think about his back­ground… The ideas that are trou­bling me and are lead­ing to this come from com­mu­nists with whom he asso­ci­at­ed when he was 9 years old” through fam­i­ly connections.

Okay so now we under­stand the for­mu­la for Obama’s com­mu­nism, the rea­son for Giuliani’s igno­rance is made clear­er. his father had been arrest­ed in 1934 for rob­bing a milk­man at gun­point and had spent a year and a half in jail. This hap­pened when young Rudolph was about 7 years.
So if a 9‑year-old Obama is a com­mu­nist for being intro­duced to Communist, then it nat­u­ral­ly fol­lows that Giuliani is indeed a gun-tot­ing-stick up felon for his time spent with and being his father’s son.
It is a fair analy­sis to make using Giuliani’s logic.

I must admit I am no fan of El Deuce, that much must be clear by now. Why? Because he is a hyp­o­crit­i­cal racist.
He is nar­cis­sis­tic glo­ry hound.
There are ample exam­ples of Giuliani’s glo­ry hunting.
As a U.S. Attorney Giuliani devel­oped the rep­u­ta­tion as some­thing of a pub­lic­i­ty seek­er, some­times pub­licly hand-cuff­ing mob boss­es and busi­ness lead­ers on trumped up charges only to qui­et­ly drop the charges later.

The façade he pre­sent­ed as some kind of great American Mayor fed by the swoon­ing New York Press and a Nation look­ing for heroes after September 11^th 2001 could nev­er stand the smell test, or with­stand scruti­ny when the scab is peeled back.
It is laugh­able when tele­vi­sion talk­ing heads tell us Giuliani is sul­ly­ing his image as America’s Mayor with this far right rhetoric.
The truth is Giuliani had no record to sul­ly, he made the deci­sion to place the city’s com­mand cen­ter in the world trade cen­ter build­ing after the build­ing had already expe­rienxced one ter­ror­ists attack in 1993.
If incom­pe­tence and bad judge­ment qual­i­fies one as a good American Mayor then Obama’s sol­id lead­er­ship since he took the reins of America’s col­lapsed econ­o­my cer­tain­ly makes him a can­di­date for sainthood.
Giuliani’s hor­ri­ble judge­ment and arro­gance far exceeds the deci­sion to house the con­trol cen­ter in the world trade center.
President Bush tapped Kerik, as his nom­i­nee for home­land secu­ri­ty sec­re­tary, but Kerik abrupt­ly with­drew his name after reveal­ing that he had not paid all required tax­es for a fam­i­ly nan­ny-house­keep­er and that the woman may have been in the coun­try illegally.

Kerik a for­mer NYPD com­mis­sion­er appoint­ed by Giuliani and lat­er his busi­ness part­ner was rec­om­mend­ed to Bush by none oth­er than Giuliani.
Bernard Kerik was lat­er to do time in a fed­er­al prison.
Giuliani’s abuse of his office through police pro­tec­tion he received as he trekked to Long Island to see his mis­tress Judith Nathan at the cost of tens of thou­sands of dol­lars to the city’s tax-pay­ers is well documented.

These are just a few of the trans­gres­sions we know of the hyp­o­crit­i­cal glo­ry-hound Giuliani. We also know that he gets paid hand­some­ly as a con­sul­tant and speak­er com­mand­ing up to 80K per speak­ing engage­ment where he pro­vides strate­gic coun­sel in emer­gency preparedness. 
If ever there was an irony.
Giuliani needs to be in the news, that’s how the mon­ey keep rolling in. He is pre­pared to say and do any­thing to be in the news and he is doing just that.

This guy is not run­ning for dog-catch­er yet every­one is talk­ing about him and that’s exact­ly what he craves.

No one expects any par­tic­u­lar Democrat to defend our President from the vile dis­gust­ing and con­cert­ed rhetoric com­ing from his ene­mies on the right,but blacks must remem­ber the likes of Hillary Clinton and prob­a­bly most impor­tant­ly Andrew Coumo.

Coumo New’s York Governor, gave a long mean­der­ing speech at the funer­al for his late father Mario Coumo a for­mer Governor whom some viewed as a lib­er­al lion and a cham­pi­on for those with­out mon­ey and pow­er. As I lis­tened to the speech, I thought to myself the

speech made one thing clear Andrew Coumo was no Mario Coumo.
Real lead­ers lead from the front , not hide behind and do what is polit­i­cal­ly expe­di­ent. Cuomo hid while Mayor deBlasio stood and took heat for his stance on Police abuse.
As the state’s Governor, Cuomo did not have to defend the state’s black cit­i­zens, God for­bid, but he could have stood with deBlasio anoth­er white man who did the right thing.
Andrew Cuomo chose to remain silent.

Unfortunately though Cuomo ben­e­fit­ed immense­ly from black votes in the last elec­tions he could not muster up the balls or the char­ac­ter to stand with them in their moment of travail. 

Though Cuomo won the last elec­tions beat­ing Republican rival Rob Astorino by 13 per­cent­age points, the National review report­ed that Astorino col­lect­ed 1.3 mil­lion votes — or 49 per­cent — com­pared to Cuomo’s 1.2 mil­lion, or 46 per­cent, in a low-turnout elec­tion. Three third-par­ty can­di­dates were also on the bal­lot. Cuomo’s 13-per­cent­age-point win over Republican chal­lenger Rob Astorino on Nov. 4 was fueled by a large mar­gin of vic­to­ry in New York City, where he took home 77 per­cent of the near­ly 1 mil­lion bal­lots cast, accord­ing to the state Board of Election’s unof­fi­cial results.

He did not do well in white Democratic lib­er­al strong­holds ‚gen­er­al­ly speak­ing Cuomo did best in the

ADs that are pre­dom­i­nant­ly black.”
 Democrats have tak­en the black vote for grant­ed for decades. They prob­a­bly will for decades more, unless blacks cease vot­ing, or avail them­selves to the real­i­ties they face. The fact is that Democrats know that blacks can­not run to the Republican par­ty, so they do not have to earn the votes of their most loy­al vot­ers, nei­ther do they have to stand with them.
So Cuomo did not feel the need to stand up for black peo­ple in New York City.
nei­ther does he feel the need to repu­di­ate the vile crea­ture Rudolph Giuliani on his bot­tom feed­ing gut­ter attack on our President.

Chances are Andrew Cuomo is not will­ing to ruf­fle the feath­ers of anoth­er Italian, a repub­li­can who crossed par­ty line and endorsed his father when he ran for a fourth term in 1994.

On the occa­sion of cross­ing par­ty lines to endorse the elder Cuomo, Guiliani said. “George Pataki’s only essen­tial char­ac­ter­is­tic is that he offers an alter­na­tive. “Strangely, how­ev­er, after lengthy analy­sis and a lot of soul-search­ing, I’ve come to the con­clu­sion that it is George Pataki who best per­son­i­fies the sta­tus quo of New York pol­i­tics — a can­di­date tak­ing as few posi­tions as pos­si­ble, all of them as gen­er­al as pos­si­ble, tak­ing no risks and being guid­ed and script­ed by oth­ers. He has sim­ply not made the case that he is the agent of change.”
This is the very first time I con­cur with any­thing Giuliani has to say, only this time the very words

Giuliani used to described George Pataki as he bat­tled Mario Cuomo, are now total­ly appro­pri­ate in describ­ing Andrew Cuomo.
New York’s black vot­ers should nev­er for­get the cow­ardice of Andrew Cuomo when they need­ed their Governor to stand with them.
They should nev­er for­get the cow­ardice of Andrew Cuomo when he refused to stand against the vile naked big­otry of his fel­low Italian, Rudolph Giuliani in his inces­sant attacks against the Nation’s first black chief-executive.
But I will not hold my breath that this will hap­pen, chances are many of the state’s black vot­ers don’t even both­er to hold Coumo account­able, or know they should.
Given the chance they will once again go into vot­ing booths and vote for Andrew Cuomo again and again, and again.

“I do not believe, and I know this is a hor­ri­ble thing to say, but I do not believe that the pres­i­dent loves America,” Giuliani said dur­ing the din­ner at the 21 Club, a for­mer Prohibition-era speakeasy in mid­town Manhattan. “He does­n’t love you. And he does­n’t love me. He was­n’t brought up the way you were brought up and I was brought up through love of this country.”

Anyone who thought the war against President Obama was any­thing but racial is liv­ing a delud­ed exis­tence. President Barack Obama can­not run for anoth­er elect­ed office in America. He has rough­ly two years left in office. So one would have thought that even at fund-rais­ers oppo­nents would have sought to talk about poten­tial adver­saries , not the guy who can non longer beat them.
So what moti­vates the oppo­si­tion to Obama you ask?
Race does.
For a sick dement­ed swath of the Republican right, President Obama rep­re­sents a gross depar­ture from the foun­da­tion tenets and teach­ings of white suprema­cy and could only have attained the office through fraud, or evil des­ig­na­tion such as their charge he is an impos­tor from Kenya and worse, a dev­il Manchurian candidate.
Whether you assign cre­dence to the pub­lic­i­ty whore Rudolph Giuliani, or you believe as the National Review’s Kevin D Williamson does that,“Barack Obama spent years in the Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s church as the church­man ful­mi­nat­ed: “God Damn America!” The Reverend Wright’s infa­mous “God Damn America!” ser­mon charges the coun­try with a litany of abus­es: slav­ery, mis­treat­ment of the Indians, “treat­ing cit­i­zens as less than human,” etc. A less rav­ing ver­sion of the same indict­ment can be found in the president’s own speech­es and books. His social cir­cle includes such fig­ures as Bill Ayers and Bernadette Dohrn, who expressed their love of coun­try by par­tic­i­pat­ing in a mur­der­ous ter­ror­ist cam­paign against it”.
You must divorce your­self from the facts of those atroc­i­ties, suck up the abuse and nev­er men­tion it but be grate­ful that they live in the utopia of American exceptional-ism.
nev­er mind the inde­fen­si­ble atroc­i­ties met­ed out to peo­ple of col­or, the issue is not the abuse is that you dare ques­tion the method­ol­o­gy used on the path to American exceptionalism.

As loathe as I am to acknowl­edge Giuliani’s exis­tence, I do so to high­light the fact that even though they know they lie they can­not resist the lure to lie to fur­ther their agenda.
“I do not believe, and I know this is a hor­ri­ble thing to say, but I do not believe that the pres­i­dent loves America,”.
It is a hor­ri­ble thing to say because it’s a lie. The truth demands no apol­o­gy. It is hor­ri­ble that even though the despi­ca­ble Giuliani knows he was lying he could not tame his vile tongue. He knew it was the thing that would play well in that room of equal­ly vile crea­tures of hate and lies.
They gath­er using lies and deceit as they eat the meat of con­tra­dic­tion. Because on the right, right is what’s right for them. Truth is a dis­pens­able option used for expe­di­en­cy. The ide­o­log­i­cal fight around Immigration , Voting Rights and Budget allo­ca­tions are not fights they wage on right­eous prin­ci­ples. They are ide­o­log­i­cal fights waged around the con­cept of white suprema­cy and white entitlements.

In two years they will not have Obama to kick around any more,but their hate­ful rhetoric will con­tin­ue on bud­get, vot­ing, immi­gra­tion, and on police abuse so the next demo­c­ra­t­ic pres­i­dent will be no less a bogey-man/­woman, just not the Kenyan-born, Manchurian can­di­date sent to destroy their repub­lic.

A very seri­ous breach of diplo­mat­ic pro­to­col is about to be com­mit­ted by

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu .
The Israeli Prime Minister was invit­ed by the United States Speaker of the House John Boehner to address the American Congress. 
Netanyahu is sched­uled to address the con­gress on the talks between the Obama Administration and oth­er pow­ers, includ­ing Britain, Germany, France,China, Russia and Iran , on Iran’s nuclear program.
Initially Netanyahu was slat­ed to address the House in February but the speech has been pushed back to March 3^rd.

The prob­lem with the speech is that no one in the speak­er’s office both­ered to noti­fy the White House that Netanyahu was sched­uled to address the con­gress just two weeks pri­or to that coun­try’s elec­tions to pick a new leader.
The White House insists that the Israeli Ambassador recent­ly met with Secretary of state John Kerry for two hours but did not both­er to men­tion that Netanyahu was com­ing to address congress.
In fact Boehner made it clear that his invite to Netanyahu was intend­ed to be a dis­re­spect­ful ges­ture to President Obama.
Boehner said quote: The Republicans are inter­est­ed in send­ing a “clear mes­sage to the White House — and the world — about our com­mit­ment to Israel and our allies,”.
Boehner who did not even both­er to tell mem­bers of the demo­c­ra­t­ic cau­cus in

the house of his deci­sion to invite Netanyahu,sees noth­ing wrong with usurp­ing nor­mal pro­to­cols to make anoth­er polit­i­cal statement.
Netantahu a right wing hawk who crave war with Iran, is anx­ious to use the American Congress two weeks before a tight elec­tion in Israel to lift his own profile.
Most of all how­ev­er, Netanyahu no fan of Obama, seem to rel­ish the oppor­tu­ni­ty to poke a fin­ger into Obama’s eye as the American pres­i­dent enters the fourth quar­ter of his presidency.
Republicans for their part are not con­cerned about any dis­re­spect to Obama, in fact that seem to be exact­ly their intention.
President Obama has inti­mat­ed he will not meet with Netanyahu.
There is a long stand­ing pro­to­col not to meet with for­eign lead­ers that close to elec­tions in their own coun­tries, the pres­i­dent said.
No one believes those are the rea­sons the pres­i­dent will not meet with Netanyahu however.
The office of Vice pres­i­dent Biden said, Biden will not be attend­ing the speech either.
Members of the con­gres­sion­al black cau­cus have also indi­cat­ed they will not be attend­ing the speech.
In Israel there is very lit­tle sup­port for the speech, the Times of Israel pub­lished a poll which shows In response to the ques­tion, “Do you think Prime Minister Netanyahu should trav­el to speak before the US Congress?” a major­i­ty of 52% said no, com­pared to 36% in favor. A fur­ther 12% said that they didn’t know whether Netanyahu should go.

Set aside the breach of diplo­mat­ic pro­to­col for a sec­ond then ask yourselves

why would Netanyahu do some­thing so poten­tial­ly dam­ag­ing to American Israeli relations?
Never mind the actions of Republicans, any­one still doubt­ful that their actions toward pres­i­dent Obama are any­thing but racial need to have their heads examined.
Netanyahu must have cal­cu­lat­ed that his vis­it will give him a boost in polls at home. He prob­a­bly sees this as an oppor­tune time to stick it to Obama, whom he clear­ly has very lit­tle love for.
Netanyahu does not believe there are any dan­gers to the bi-lat­er­al rela­tions between the two coun­tries. Why would he ?America has pledged unequiv­o­cal sup­port to the Zionist state, that will not change because he is dis­re­spect­ful to it’s first black pres­i­dent, if any­thing it will bol­ster that relationship.

In an Observer Article dat­ed Feb 3^rd 2015, retired Jamaica Defense Force Colonel Allan Douglas wrote an Article which could only be con­strued to be in defense of Garrisons. In his Article Douglas said this.
Regrettably, through­out my mil­i­tary career, I have often heard from civil­ians the solu­tion of “flat­ten­ing” areas over and over; ‘Just flat­ten Rema, Tivoli, etc, and the crime prob­lem would be solved!’ they say. So, I have become very sus­pi­cious with pro­posed solu­tions like “dis­man­tling polit­i­cal gar­risons”. What exact­ly do peo­ple mean when they speak of dis­man­tling garrisons?
Clearly Douglas miss­es the feel­ing of exas­per­a­tion of cit­i­zens who make those state­ments. It appears that despite a car­rear in the JDF and hav­ing attained the rank of Colonel, Douglas has very lit­tle under­stand­ing of what obtains on the streets of Jamaica’s Garrisons, or what are often referred to as zones of polit­i­cal exclusions. 
It could be either that Douglas did not spend enough time out­side Duppy Gate, or that he is once again act­ing as a de-fac­to defend­er of the People’s National Party’s failures.
See Article here. http://​www​.jamaicaob​serv​er​.com/​c​o​l​u​m​n​s​/​W​e​-​c​a​n​-​t​-​j​ust – flat­ten – garrisons_18340450
Colonel Douglas in what could eas­i­ly be mis­in­ter­pret­ed as a stout defense of the poor, unwit­ting­ly showed his Orange col­ors ‚Quote:  I have become very sus­pi­cious with pro­posed solu­tions like “dis­man­tling polit­i­cal gar­risons”. What exact­ly do peo­ple mean when they speak of dis­man­tling garrisons?

Technically only the rul­ing peo­ple’s National Party has true gar­risons remain­ing . Having held state pow­er for most of the time since inde­pen­dence, the PNP is the sole par­ty with scarce resources to dole out. This has allowed the par­ty to increase and con­sol­i­date it’s hold on state pow­er because of it’s abil­i­ty to dish out scarce resources. This means that in actu­al­i­ty each elec­tion cycle less and less seats are actu­al­ly in play. 

Incredibly after a car­rear in the Nation’s secu­ri­ty forces, Allan Douglas could speak on the issue of Garrisons as if in defense of them. If the good­ly Colonel had spent some time out­side of the Banana Republic type con­fines of Up-Park Camp, where sub­or­di­nates cater to his demands, he would cer­tain­ly have rec­og­nized that the prob­lem of Jamaica’s Garrisons was nev­er the func­tion of the young sol­diers and police offi­cers who police and die in these gar­risons , but are well designed strate­gies aimed at divid­ing and con­quer­ing so that the archi­tects may hold state power.
Just maybe if Colonel Douglas had a sin­gle mod­icum of real empa­thy for those con­demned to a life­time of incar­cer­a­tion with­in the imag­i­nary walls of Jamaica’s gar­risons, he would be using his voice and posi­tion to trum­pet.….….. yes the dis­man­tling process of all garrisons.

They are not gar­risons in the strict mil­i­tary dic­tio­nary mean­ing of the word. The com­mu­ni­ties can’t be “flat­tened” as if one was strik­ing a mil­i­tary tent­ed camp or shut­ting down a mil­i­tary strong­hold and reduc­ing the build­ings to rub­ble. So just how is this dis­man­tling exer­cise to be done?I sus­pect that there are many who would still advo­cate and have imple­ment­ed some sort of “eth­nic cleans­ing” type of oper­a­tion. I also sus­pect that those advo­cat­ing dis­man­tling of gar­risons haven’t the slight­est clue as to how they are going to go about doing so. What are the fac­tors to be con­sid­ered in this dis­man­tling exer­cise? If the social, polit­i­cal and eco­nom­ic fac­tors of this dis­man­tling exer­cise have been thor­ough­ly thought out, it cer­tain­ly must be one of Jamaica’s best-kept secrets. It is my opin­ion that, for far too long we have treat­ed these com­mu­ni­ties and the peo­ple who live there­in with scorn and deri­sion. We have tram­pled all over their rights, mur­dered their inno­cent young­sters, and so often com­fort­ed our­selves with the thought that they are all just a bunch of crim­i­nals and are deserv­ing of death by any means. And, if by chance a baby in a crib is slaugh­tered — and these things do hap­pen — col­lat­er­al death is accept­able. If the bod­ies of young­sters shot by our secu­ri­ty forces are left to rot on the road for dogs and crows to take their pick, then so be it, because they are all a bunch of hor­ri­ble crim­i­nals and deserve it. Their voic­es are very rarely lis­tened to when they cry out for jus­tice, and their lead­ers and defend­ers of their rights are demonised. Despite all of that, they sur­vive and are real, and out of what we regard as the cesspit of our coun­try, they have pro­duced many who have gone on to bring fame and glo­ry to Jamaica — and, oh, how we love them then!

My point is, if we are anx­ious, as Jamaicans, to stop the obvi­ous rot from with­in our soci­ety, we must be more car­ing of each oth­er, regard­less of our sta­tions in life. Our laws must be just and admin­is­tered fair­ly. If one inno­cent Jamaican is killed, it must be the busi­ness of all Jamaicans. If we “flat­ten” with­out a con­science, the back-blast is bound to hurt all Jamaicans in the long run, not just the criminals.

“They are not gar­risons in the strict mil­i­tary dic­tio­nary mean­ing of the word so they can’t be flat­tened” . Well Colonel they can be , but no one, no sane per­son at least, is sug­gest­ing that they be lit­er­al­ly flat­tened. Not because it is a bad idea to flat­ten them phys­i­cal­ly, does not mean they should not be dismantled.
The mind­set of depen­den­cy and enti­tle­ment which fer­til­izes and nur­tures the gar­ri­son cul­ture, does noth­ing to advance the pros­per­i­ty and well being of those who reside with­in those con­fines . Voting with una­nim­i­ty for one par­ty or the oth­er, believ­ing that scarce resources will come flow­ing is nev­er a sus­tain­able path to true inde­pen­dence and pros­per­i­ty. The prob­lem is that there is nev­er enough to go around after the prin­ci­pal play­ers have gouged them­selves with the slop

stolen from the pub­lic trough.
On that basis ‚the only true option for the poor and dis­pos­sessed is the utter dis­man­tling of all gar­risons and a return to the true entre­pre­neur­ial spir­it of the free and unencumbered.. 
You see Colonel as you stat­ed, Jamaica’s gar­risons are cer­tain­ly not Garrisons in the mil­i­tary sense. So no ‚flat­ten­ing them would be ill-advised. However, it is evi­dent that you suf­fer from the same type of blind­ness which struck Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller. After all she famous­ly stat­ed that her par­ty has no gar­risons because she does­n’t not see any walls. 
Yes Colonel, the walls are not lit­er­al they are men­tal, so yes, we must begin the slow painstak­ing process of dis­man­tling the mind­set of Garrison dwellers.
Then and only then, will all Jamaicans have an oppor­tu­ni­ty to live out the full promise of their lives, free and unshack­led from the promise of state fund­ed largess. In the end the only true bene­fac­tors are those with polit­i­cal pow­er and those who exert mus­cle on their behalf. 

The reduc­tion in the crime sta­tis­tics toward the lat­ter part of last year could not be pinned to a prov­able strategy. 
We did not feel there was any­thing in the speech of the Minister of National Security on the sub­ject which could be attrib­uted to the down­ward trend.
As such we said it was temporary

and at best prob­a­bly just luck.
The busi­ness of crime fight­ing as it is with almost every oth­er ven­ture must be pinned to a formula.

That for­mu­la must be goal ori­ent­ed with well artic­u­lat­ed, mea­sur­able steps to accom­plish­ing those goals.
Until the JCF devel­ops and exe­cute a strat­e­gy fol­low­ing those guide­lines it will sim­ply be putting out fires
Now we are aware there are socio-eco­nom­ic fac­tors at play as well as a decrepit crim­i­nal jus­tice sys­tem, inad­e­quate laws, and polit­i­cal inter­fer­ence, which are dri­ving crime in the Island. The police how­ev­er must hold up it’s end of the bargain.
In so far as crime is con­cerned in Jamaica, the JCF is fail­ing dis­mal­ly, based on their own num­bers, if the JCF was a busi­ness it would have fold­ed a long time ago.
Oh by the way crime is a busi­ness and so is crime fighting.1
Jamaica has a Government which is not about the rule of law.
She also have a police depart­ment that could­n’t find it’s way out of a barrel.
Our coun­try is in for a lot more dark days before it real­izes the light.

Jamaica has aver­aged 3.2 mur­ders per day for the new month of January, com­pared to 2.75 per day for all of 2014.
Imagine almost a hun­dred dead bod­ies laid out in a row , all killed in less than a month, in a small Island with a pop­u­la­tion of 2.7 million.
Despite these shock­ing , yet un-sur­pris­ing num­bers the coun­try’s min­is­ter of secu­ri­ty is ask­ing the nation not to panic.
Minister Bunting had this to say.
“If this rate con­tin­ues, we could see the month end­ing with approx­i­mate­ly 100 mur­ders. However, let me point out that, even in 2014, we had two months with mur­ders above 100, which points to the ran­dom­ness in how these crimes occur, and to demon­strate that we need not be undu­ly alarmed at this time,” 
let me point out that at the end of last year the Jamaican Police depart­ment and min­is­ter Bunting bragged about south­ward trend­ing crime statistics.
Murders they report­ed had dropped 16 per cent, shoot­ings were down 12 per cent, rape had fall­en by 23 per cent and aggra­vat­ed assault by 17 per cent. Of note is the fact that Police killings have dropped a pre­cip­i­tous 54% against the last cor­re­spond­ing period.

See. 16 % Reduction In Murder Rate Commendable Yet…

At the risk of sound­ing neg­a­tive we argued then that we con­grat­u­lat­ed the JCF/​JDF for their hard work under dif­fi­cult cir­cum­stances with mar­gin­al to non-exis­tent sup­port from the Miller Administration. We also opined that we were very skep­ti­cal that the down­ward trend could be sus­tained in the absence of (1 a well artic­u­lat­ed prov­able for­mu­la , and (2 An econ­o­my that is at best anemic.
We also felt that nei­ther the Minister nor the Police depart­ment had pre­sent­ed any evi­dence to which they could rea­son­ably claim was attrib­ut­able to the low­er num­bers then.

Minister Bunting in try­ing to explain the spike in mur­ders yet allay fears simul­ta­ne­ous­ly , said “The secu­ri­ty forces are respond­ing oper­a­tional­ly to the gang sit­u­a­tion in St Catherine North, and in so doing, we will employ the approach­es that worked in 2014, name­ly tar­get­ing vio­lence pro­duc­ers, dom­i­nat­ing crit­i­cal hot-spots, pri­or­i­tiz­ing foren­sic and inves­tiga­tive resources to this area, and dry­ing up the fund­ing sources for these crim­i­nal organisations,”.
The state­ments of the min­is­ter to any­one in the know is a des­per­ate attempt to buy time.The Minister ear­li­er last year stat­ed that despite the best efforts of law-enforce­ment crime con­tin­ued to esca­late. He argued then for divine inter­ven­tion. If the best efforts of the police then were not enough to arrest the spi­ral­ing crime wave , how can the min­is­ter advance his lat­est argu­ments on how to low­er the num­ber of homicides?
Sources on the ground tells me the wave of homi­cides being com­mit­ted in the areas named by the min­is­ter are direct­ly attrib­ut­able to the Klans-man gang affil­i­at­ed to , you guessed it, the rul­ing People’s National Party Administration of Portia Simpson Miller.

All across You-tube there are videos of peo­ple fight­ing and being dis­re­spect­ful to police officers. 
Never before in the his­to­ry of our coun­try, save and except dur­ing the Manley débâ­cle of the 70’s, has Jamaica’s crim­i­nals have such crate-blanche to do as they please.
As a cop in the late 80’s, to ear­ly 90’s, I felt we were oper­at­ing with our hands tied behind our backs. Today’s cops are oper­at­ing with their hands tied behind their backs and are also blindfolded. 
There is no rule-of-law in Jamaica, our coun­try is essen­tial­ly a klep­toc­ra­cy. The present Administration is large­ly seen as bla­tant­ly cor­rupt and incompetent.
The litany of alle­ga­tions against the Government remains so, (alle­ga­tions only, because there is no redress in the courts for the peo­ple who want a func­tion­ing democracy. 

Being in pow­er for inor­di­nate stretch­es of time, has allowed the rul­ing PNP to place cor­rupt func­tionar­ies at all lev­els of civic life and con­sol­i­date it’s bases of pow­er. The court being no excep­tion. The last extend­ed stretch the par­ty had was for an unprece­dent­ed 18 ¹⁄₂ years. 
Imagine how much harm a cor­rupt admin­is­tra­tion can do in that much time.
Notwithstanding the Opposition Jamaica Labor Party has also failed to offer strong deci­sive alter­na­tive for­ward-lean­ing lead­er­ship. Thus far the oppo­si­tion has been reduced to a cas­trat­ed dog which can only dream of a time when it was able to have it’s pick of bitches.
The nation in gen­er­al has been des­ig­nat­ed 84% cor­rupt by the European based Transparency International. In essence the vot­ers and the admin­is­tra­tion have been a per­fect match-made in corruption-heaven.

The INDECOM Act which was cre­at­ed by the Opposition JLP while in pow­er between 2007- to 2011, was draft­ed and passed in response to massive

police cor­rup­tion and abuse. The Act though well inten­tion-ed , was poor­ly craft­ed and imple­ment­ed. The Act may have mar­gin­al, yet unproven effect on police cor­rup­tion but it has mea­sur­ably had a chill­ing effect on offi­cers abil­i­ty to do their jobs.
If any­thing, the Act has embold­ened a law-less pop­u­la­tion to be even more abra­sive and abu­sive of the rule of law and those who enforce the laws.
From the off­set the Commissioner giv­en the task to head the neo­phyte Agency was more con­cerned about ele­vat­ing his own stature and self aggran­diz­ing than remov­ing rogue cops and work­ing with the Police depart­ment toward the rule of law.

Jamaicans at home who yearn for a crime-free coun­try hope against hope . There is no foun­da­tion being laid which will bear fruits of a just and crime/­cor­rup­tion-free country.
The nation needs a com­plete re-align­ment away from crim­i­nal­i­ty. This is no easy task there is sim­ply too much cor­rup­tion with­ing the body politic. The Government is inher­ent­ly cor­rupt, who will re-align and mobi­lize the people?
Jamaicans resid­ing in the dias­po­ra kid them­selves about the direc­tion of our coun­try. Many chose to pre­tend that the coun­try will some­how fix itself, while they give aid and com­fort to the crim­i­nal enhanc­ing Government in Kingston.
The rest of us are aware there will be a lot more blood-shed before peo­ple wake up from their slum­ber to the real­i­ties of what has hap­pened to our country.

Another People’s National Party politi­cian will soon face the courts, this time on charges he attempt­ed to per­vert the course of justice.
The inci­dent orig­i­nat­ed in St. Thomas and stemmed from an inci­dent where a polit­i­cal­ly con­nect­ed 46-year-old Pastor alleged­ly sex­u­al­ly assault­ed a minor.
It is alleged the Councillor and a busi­ness per­son attempt­ed to con­vince the moth­er of the child not to press charges.
The Director of Public Prosecution has since ruled that both men be charged with attempt­ing to per­vert the course of justice.
Recently we report­ed on this mat­ter when we learned that a female Police com­man­der was ver­bal­ly assault­ed at a coun­cil meet­ing in the parish as a result she walked out of that meeting.
It is becom­ing clear­er by the day that the Simpson Miller Government is an out of con­trol Kleptocracy which no one dare ques­tion. Media Houses are afraid of report­ing on the cor­rup­tion with­ing the Government out of fear of being dragged before the courts on slan­der charges to face par­ty hack/​s on the bench.
Others are cheer-lead­ers of the corruption.
The list of scan­dals are well known and well documented.
(1) Finsac.
(2)Cuban Light bulb.
(3) Outameni.
(4)Trafigura.
The list goes on. 
No need to get excit­ed about the immi­nent arrest of these two how­ev­er, crim­i­nal tri­als in Jamaica of the polit­i­cal­ly con­nect­ed rarely result in convictions. 
The like­li­hood that a Councillor or Member of Parliament will be con­vict­ed is next to nil.
Jamaica’s cor­rup­tion runs much deep­er than just cor­rup­tion with­in the admin­is­tra­tion, it’s endemic.
The Courts despite the hype, are more cor­rupt than many Jamaicans know. Judges have alle­giances and they exert polit­i­cal leverage.
Cases drag on and on and on sim­ply because a Magistrate says so.
Ask your­selves, “how was it pos­si­ble that Kern Spencer got out of an open and shut light bulb case”?
The Jamaican Government is not answer­able to any­one, the peo­ple them­selves do not rec­og­nize just how cor­rupt the admin­is­tra­tion is because gen­er­al­ly they are extreme­ly law­less and corrupt.
As a patri­ot­ic Jamaican it is an embar­rass­ment to list the dif­fer­ent scan­dals asso­ci­at­ed with this administration.