Like an unwelcome house guest, stories of civilian contractors failing in their support of U.S. troops is Iraq and elsewhere, keep flooding the airwaves and newsprint. An Army is totally ineffective without reliable support; troops need to be fed, clothed, housed, entertained, and medicated in the rear. I always thought it was folly to replace military support personnel trained to deal with the rigors, dangers, and horrors of war, with civilian contractors who may or may not show up and do their jobs.
War is not an IPO and the U.S. Armed Forces is not a corporation. Despite Sect. of Defense Donald Rumsfelds’ protestations to the contrary, we need more men and women in the U.S. Armed Forces, period! Civilians, no matter their function, do not belong in a war zone. That is what the country formed a professional military for. Is this further evidence of the shrinking ethical and moral base of our society? Have we (the American society) in an effort to find profit in anything become completely blinded to ethical and moral principles and behaviors? What is going on?
Links to other articles of interest concerning this story:
* U.S. involvement deepens as armed conflict escalates in Colombia
* Thousands of Private Contractors Support U.S. Forces in Persian Gulf
* Corporate Warriors {audio interview with Peter W. Singer, author of Corporate Warriors}.
Monday, September 01, 2003
Monday, August 25, 2003
Martin Plan: A Blueprint for MIddle East Peace
I go on the record as stating that I think the quagmire currently swallowing the Middle East in a cesspool of senseless violence and childish thinking, is fault of both sides. That being said, I believe the Palestinians, led by Yasser Arafat(?) and Mahmoud Abbas—also known as Abu Mazen—shoulder a far greater proportion of the blame than do the Israelis at this point. The Palestinian people had peace in their grasp back in January 2000, but they had a fool representing their cause before the world. He blew it and the violence continues apace.
And now it appears as thought the Roadmap to Peace has veered off the on-ramp to civility after less then a month of peaceful co-existence. That peace was shattered by yet another militant Palestinian lunatic with a bomb who ended twenty Israeli lives and ruined scores, and scores of others. The Israeli’s, in turn, dusted off targeted assassinations, which prompted the militant Islamic factions to call off the ceasefire. And the cycle continues anew.
Quick question(s): where is the general outcry from the world when Israeli women and children are being murdered by high-grade explosives, ball bearings, nails, broken glass, rocks, and shrapnel? Where are the demonstrations in the streets of world cities against the Palestinian thugs who murder the innocent, pushing peace off a cliff into the abyss? Where is the indignation? Where are the UN resolutions denouncing terror and calling on the Palestinian Authority to once and for all rein in its militant arms?
But I digress. I believe in order to advance the cause of peace and stability in the Middle East, a new paradigm needs to be realized (no, I mean a real one this time), one in which the Arab nations and the Palestinian militant groups play a central part in the peace process; the Roadmap to Peace, however well-intended, falls way short of the mark. This new paradigm is one in which Israel is recognized as a viable state; one in which the state of Palestine finally comes into being. Let’s call it the Martin Plan for Middle East Peace.
The Martin Plan would have three over-riding objectives at its core:
The main points of the Martin Plan are as follows:
Under the Martin Plan, the United States would be called upon to act as mediator in the ongoing dispute between, not only the Israelis and the Palestinians, but the Arab states and Israel as well. Also, the U.S. would be called upon to stay engaged, and exert whatever pressure, and or, influence necessary to bring about as broad a blue print for peace by the end of 2003, and a final settlement by the end of 2004.
Under the Martin Plan, the United Nations would be called upon to become more actively engaged in the Middle-East beyond its current presence in the Sinai. This engagement should take the form of an official UN representative hand picked by the UN Secretary General to act as his surrogate in all matters concerning the UN’s part in the on-going negotiations, and the final agreement. The UN would provide a forum in which the on-going negotiations would take place. Finally, the UN and its member states would be called upon to provide those peacekeeping forces deemed necessary by the negotiating parties, to ensure the tenants of the final agreement are adhered to by all parties.
Under the Martin Plan, Israel would be called upon to immediately cease all military operations in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and cease all work on existing Israeli settlements therein, and halt plans to begin any new settlements. Israel would be required adopt UN Resolutions 1397 and 1402, which recognizes need for a Palestinian state, and call for an immediate ceasefire between the two parties.
Under the Martin Plan, the Palestinian Authority led by Yassar Arafat/Mahmoud Abbas would be called upon to immediately denounce—in Arabic and English—the use of violence and terror as a means of achieving a political settlement to the current crisis. Failure of Arafat/Abbas to definitively denounce violence and terror, would lead to a UN resolution branding him/them an enemy of peace and call for his/their immediate replacement as the head(s) of the Palestinian Authority. Finally, the Palestinian Authority would be required to recognize UN Resolutions 1397 and 1402, which identifies the need for a Palestinian state, and call for an immediate ceasefire between the two parties.
Under the Martin Plan, the Arab Nations of the Middle East region (Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq(?), Kuwait, the UAE, and Yemen) would be called upon to immediately recognize Israel’s right to exist as a sovereign nation. Each would be asked to sign a UN security counsel resolution supporting said declaration. In addition, each Arab state would pledge to exchange ambassadors within a month of the resolutions’ adoption and agree to enter into separate negotiations with Israel to secure formal peace treaties. And they (Arab states) would end support for militant Islamic Palestinian extremist groups, whose sole aim is violence and terror, and denounce those Arab states that do not. Lastly, the Arab nations would be called upon to immediately cease state sponsored negative media coverage of Israel in which the destruction of state and the extinction of it people is called for, or endorsed.
Under the Martin Plan, those Arab states surrounding Israel: Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt, would all be asked to join the negotiating table and prove that they had the best interests of the Palestinian people and the cause of peace at heart. Also, under the plan, the main Palestinian militant groups Hamas (Gaza Strip), Hezbollah (southern Lebanon), Islamic Jihad, and Arafats' own Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade (West Bank) would be asked to join the peace process, denounce terrorism and declare their support for a viable Jewish state, with recognized boarders. Failure of these groups to join the negotiating table in good faith would exclude them from future consideration; each would be branded an enemy of peace and its members accorded the same status as terrorist.
Under the Martin Plan, Jordan—which has by far the largest Palestinian population of any Arab nation—would be called upon to relinquish some land (size to be determined during negotiations) in the western part of that nation directly north of the Dead Sea. This sacrifice would be necessary to form a new Palestinian state, whose borders would be contiguous with those of the West Bank, and whose territory would be large enough to accommodate Palestinians both in the “occupied territories,” and in Jordan wishing to migrate to the newly form Palestine.
Under the Martin Plan, Syria would relinquish all claims to the Golan Heights and seek instead a lasting peace with Israel. Syria would further withdraw all troops from Lebanon, and cut off all financial and military aid to Hezbollah in southern Lebanon.
Under the Martin Plan, Egypt would relinquish the eastern portion of the Sinai Peninsula to Israel, and reclaim the western portion as its own. Neither country would be allowed militarize the peninsula except for those forces needed to patrol the border in peacetime.
Under the Martin Plan, Lebanon, with the blessing and active participation of Syria, would formally expel any and all Hezbollah forces from the central and southern regions of the country and no longer welcome them with open arms. The border with Israel would become demilitarized except for those forces needed to patrol the border in peacetime.
In closing, I am all too mindful of the ancient and emotional ties of all concerned to this small sliver of the Earth known as the Holy Land. And I am mindful as well of the deep spiritual meaning of the city of Jerusalem to Muslim and Jew alike. However, like a marriage between two souls seeking unity, peace, understanding, and mutual purpose, a compromise has to be struck. Neither side can have all of what they desire, each has to give, in order to get. The Martin Plan I believe is meaningful framework from which to build a lasting peace.
The old model for a lasting peace in the Middle East no longer seems to work; ceasefires fail, the bloodletting continues apace, and peace is pushed further and further from our collective grasps. We need a new mindset, a bold new plan (newsflash: the Roadmap to Peaceisn’t it), and a nation willing to lead the parties to a lasting peace with every tool in its arsenal. The United States is looked to by the rest of the world for leadership, its time Bush started exercising it (is that even possible?) and lead the region to a lasting peace, and I think the Martin Plan can help him realize that peace.
And now it appears as thought the Roadmap to Peace has veered off the on-ramp to civility after less then a month of peaceful co-existence. That peace was shattered by yet another militant Palestinian lunatic with a bomb who ended twenty Israeli lives and ruined scores, and scores of others. The Israeli’s, in turn, dusted off targeted assassinations, which prompted the militant Islamic factions to call off the ceasefire. And the cycle continues anew.
Quick question(s): where is the general outcry from the world when Israeli women and children are being murdered by high-grade explosives, ball bearings, nails, broken glass, rocks, and shrapnel? Where are the demonstrations in the streets of world cities against the Palestinian thugs who murder the innocent, pushing peace off a cliff into the abyss? Where is the indignation? Where are the UN resolutions denouncing terror and calling on the Palestinian Authority to once and for all rein in its militant arms?
But I digress. I believe in order to advance the cause of peace and stability in the Middle East, a new paradigm needs to be realized (no, I mean a real one this time), one in which the Arab nations and the Palestinian militant groups play a central part in the peace process; the Roadmap to Peace, however well-intended, falls way short of the mark. This new paradigm is one in which Israel is recognized as a viable state; one in which the state of Palestine finally comes into being. Let’s call it the Martin Plan for Middle East Peace.
The Martin Plan would have three over-riding objectives at its core:
- Recognition of Israel by the Palestinians (to include Islamic fundamentalist groups) and Arab nations as a legitimate state;
- It would seek to create that which the Palestinians claim they want: a homeland of their own with its capital in East Jerusalem, and;
- A cessation of the violence by militant Islamic fundamentalist groups.
The main points of the Martin Plan are as follows:
- Israel has a right to exist as a sovereign nation with internationally recognized borders.
- The Palestinian people have a right to a separate homeland bordering Israel.
- Israel would withdraw all troops from the occupied territories and will cease all work on settlements.
- The Palestinian Authority would renounce violence and terror. And the Authority will further renounce all claims to land in Israel proper, and give up the right of resettlement in said lands.
- All West Bank lands north of the Dead Sea, together with land given over by Jordan adjacent to it, would form a new Palestinian state, with its capital in East Jerusalem.
- All remaining West Bank territory bordering the Dead Sea in the east including the cities of Bethlehem and Hebron would be incorporated into Israel proper.
- Jordan would cede a tract of land (size to be negotiated) east of the West Bank to form a new Palestinian state.
- The Gaza Strip would be incorporated into Israel proper.
- The Sinai Peninsula would be spilt evenly between Israel and Egypt.
- Militant Islamic fundamentalist groups; i.e. Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, etc. would recognize Israel’s right to exist and would further cease all hostilities against the Israeli people and state.
Under the Martin Plan, the United States would be called upon to act as mediator in the ongoing dispute between, not only the Israelis and the Palestinians, but the Arab states and Israel as well. Also, the U.S. would be called upon to stay engaged, and exert whatever pressure, and or, influence necessary to bring about as broad a blue print for peace by the end of 2003, and a final settlement by the end of 2004.
Under the Martin Plan, the United Nations would be called upon to become more actively engaged in the Middle-East beyond its current presence in the Sinai. This engagement should take the form of an official UN representative hand picked by the UN Secretary General to act as his surrogate in all matters concerning the UN’s part in the on-going negotiations, and the final agreement. The UN would provide a forum in which the on-going negotiations would take place. Finally, the UN and its member states would be called upon to provide those peacekeeping forces deemed necessary by the negotiating parties, to ensure the tenants of the final agreement are adhered to by all parties.
Under the Martin Plan, Israel would be called upon to immediately cease all military operations in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and cease all work on existing Israeli settlements therein, and halt plans to begin any new settlements. Israel would be required adopt UN Resolutions 1397 and 1402, which recognizes need for a Palestinian state, and call for an immediate ceasefire between the two parties.
Under the Martin Plan, the Palestinian Authority led by Yassar Arafat/Mahmoud Abbas would be called upon to immediately denounce—in Arabic and English—the use of violence and terror as a means of achieving a political settlement to the current crisis. Failure of Arafat/Abbas to definitively denounce violence and terror, would lead to a UN resolution branding him/them an enemy of peace and call for his/their immediate replacement as the head(s) of the Palestinian Authority. Finally, the Palestinian Authority would be required to recognize UN Resolutions 1397 and 1402, which identifies the need for a Palestinian state, and call for an immediate ceasefire between the two parties.
Under the Martin Plan, the Arab Nations of the Middle East region (Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq(?), Kuwait, the UAE, and Yemen) would be called upon to immediately recognize Israel’s right to exist as a sovereign nation. Each would be asked to sign a UN security counsel resolution supporting said declaration. In addition, each Arab state would pledge to exchange ambassadors within a month of the resolutions’ adoption and agree to enter into separate negotiations with Israel to secure formal peace treaties. And they (Arab states) would end support for militant Islamic Palestinian extremist groups, whose sole aim is violence and terror, and denounce those Arab states that do not. Lastly, the Arab nations would be called upon to immediately cease state sponsored negative media coverage of Israel in which the destruction of state and the extinction of it people is called for, or endorsed.
Under the Martin Plan, those Arab states surrounding Israel: Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt, would all be asked to join the negotiating table and prove that they had the best interests of the Palestinian people and the cause of peace at heart. Also, under the plan, the main Palestinian militant groups Hamas (Gaza Strip), Hezbollah (southern Lebanon), Islamic Jihad, and Arafats' own Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade (West Bank) would be asked to join the peace process, denounce terrorism and declare their support for a viable Jewish state, with recognized boarders. Failure of these groups to join the negotiating table in good faith would exclude them from future consideration; each would be branded an enemy of peace and its members accorded the same status as terrorist.
Under the Martin Plan, Jordan—which has by far the largest Palestinian population of any Arab nation—would be called upon to relinquish some land (size to be determined during negotiations) in the western part of that nation directly north of the Dead Sea. This sacrifice would be necessary to form a new Palestinian state, whose borders would be contiguous with those of the West Bank, and whose territory would be large enough to accommodate Palestinians both in the “occupied territories,” and in Jordan wishing to migrate to the newly form Palestine.
Under the Martin Plan, Syria would relinquish all claims to the Golan Heights and seek instead a lasting peace with Israel. Syria would further withdraw all troops from Lebanon, and cut off all financial and military aid to Hezbollah in southern Lebanon.
Under the Martin Plan, Egypt would relinquish the eastern portion of the Sinai Peninsula to Israel, and reclaim the western portion as its own. Neither country would be allowed militarize the peninsula except for those forces needed to patrol the border in peacetime.
Under the Martin Plan, Lebanon, with the blessing and active participation of Syria, would formally expel any and all Hezbollah forces from the central and southern regions of the country and no longer welcome them with open arms. The border with Israel would become demilitarized except for those forces needed to patrol the border in peacetime.
In closing, I am all too mindful of the ancient and emotional ties of all concerned to this small sliver of the Earth known as the Holy Land. And I am mindful as well of the deep spiritual meaning of the city of Jerusalem to Muslim and Jew alike. However, like a marriage between two souls seeking unity, peace, understanding, and mutual purpose, a compromise has to be struck. Neither side can have all of what they desire, each has to give, in order to get. The Martin Plan I believe is meaningful framework from which to build a lasting peace.
The old model for a lasting peace in the Middle East no longer seems to work; ceasefires fail, the bloodletting continues apace, and peace is pushed further and further from our collective grasps. We need a new mindset, a bold new plan (newsflash: the Roadmap to Peaceisn’t it), and a nation willing to lead the parties to a lasting peace with every tool in its arsenal. The United States is looked to by the rest of the world for leadership, its time Bush started exercising it (is that even possible?) and lead the region to a lasting peace, and I think the Martin Plan can help him realize that peace.
Friday, August 22, 2003
Judge Moore Suspended
This just in: Alabama's (clueless) chief justice was suspended Friday for his refusal to obey a federal court order to remove his Ten Commandments monument from the rotunda of his courthouse. I say here, here! It is comforting to know that Judge (and I use the term loosely) Moore is alone in his elementary interpretation and understanding of our federal constitution.
Thursday, August 21, 2003
The Roadmap Takes a Very Wrong Turn
Who could have predicted this?
The Palestinian militant groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad have called off their ceasefire after an Israeli missile strike killed a Hamas leader in Gaza City. This after a Palestine suicide bomber killed scores of Israelis (and others) in Jerusalem on Tuesday.
U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said the attack did not mean the end of the roadmap, but doesn’t it? With neither side willing to truly compromise, the Roadmap to Peace(?) really never had a chance to succeed, and now it is just another in a long line of failed proposals. And the Bush Administration seems ambivalent, at best, to the entire situation, unwilling or unable to make the really hard decisions that would move the process forward and put an end, once and for all, to the bloodshed. Action on the part of the U.S. needs to go beyond mere rhetoric to a solid plan of action that draws the surrounding countries into roadmap.
Syria for instance must be persuaded, or pressured, into ending its support of the militant Islamic factions now at work in The West Bank, Gaza Strip, and Lebanon. And Lebanon must be persuaded to finally crack down on Hezbollah and expel them from the country. Peace, I submit, cannot move forward without an end to the bloodshed fostered by militant Islamic groups who claim to have to best interests of the Palestinian people at heart. Failure of leadership from the Bush Administration? I say yes, what say you?
The Palestinian militant groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad have called off their ceasefire after an Israeli missile strike killed a Hamas leader in Gaza City. This after a Palestine suicide bomber killed scores of Israelis (and others) in Jerusalem on Tuesday.
U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said the attack did not mean the end of the roadmap, but doesn’t it? With neither side willing to truly compromise, the Roadmap to Peace(?) really never had a chance to succeed, and now it is just another in a long line of failed proposals. And the Bush Administration seems ambivalent, at best, to the entire situation, unwilling or unable to make the really hard decisions that would move the process forward and put an end, once and for all, to the bloodshed. Action on the part of the U.S. needs to go beyond mere rhetoric to a solid plan of action that draws the surrounding countries into roadmap.
Syria for instance must be persuaded, or pressured, into ending its support of the militant Islamic factions now at work in The West Bank, Gaza Strip, and Lebanon. And Lebanon must be persuaded to finally crack down on Hezbollah and expel them from the country. Peace, I submit, cannot move forward without an end to the bloodshed fostered by militant Islamic groups who claim to have to best interests of the Palestinian people at heart. Failure of leadership from the Bush Administration? I say yes, what say you?
Tuesday, August 19, 2003
Who is Arianna Huffington
Who is Arianna Huffington, the woman who would be governor of California? Herein lies (almost) all you ever wanted to know about the articulate flip-flopping handsome woman with the Greek accent who lives in an estimated 7 million estate in Brentwood California. Would she make a better governor then the current embattled Gray Davis? I certainly think she would make a better governor then the (overly) popular Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has yet to spell out in any significant way his position on the problems vexing the state.
Huffington sponsored Websites:
* Arianna Online
* Arianna Huffington for Governor of California
LATimes Feature Articles:
* Candidate Profile: Arianna Huffington
* Huffington Manager Also Works as a Lobbyist
* Huffington Can’t Dodge Tax Questions
* Huffington Calls Schwarzenegger GOP Insider
* Huffington Paid Little Income Tax
* Camejo, Huffington Form Unorthodox Alliance
Huffington sponsored Websites:
* Arianna Online
* Arianna Huffington for Governor of California
LATimes Feature Articles:
* Candidate Profile: Arianna Huffington
* Huffington Manager Also Works as a Lobbyist
* Huffington Can’t Dodge Tax Questions
* Huffington Calls Schwarzenegger GOP Insider
* Huffington Paid Little Income Tax
* Camejo, Huffington Form Unorthodox Alliance
Friday, August 08, 2003
Bush is Looking Through a Glass Darkly...
The Accidental President is looking through a glass darkly if he sincerely believes that Iraq is more secure now than the day the 3rd Infantry Division’s mechanized juggernaut first rolled through the shattered Baghdad streets. Safely ensconced in Crawford TX, with the “good old boys” of his administration, Bush, when asked about American progress toward quelling the violence in Iraq and returning the country to a sense of normalcy offered only this,
Really Mr. Accidental President? On the way to work this morning I heard a rather lengthy report on National Public Radio about the continuing problems with the Iraqi electrical grid. Looting and sabotage continue to fester as an issue. And so much copper is being smuggled out of Iraq and onto the world copper market, that it is beginning to effect world copper prices. Is this what Bush means by improvement? How then can the economy of Iraq be improving without a reliable electrical source(s)? And this is only one of the problems vexing American administrators fighting to bring Iraq under control.
Where is the end game; where is the exit strategy; when are the national elections; where is Saddam; when are American troops coming home? None of these questions, nor many others, will be answered by the Crawford tumbleweed trio (Bush, Cheney & Rumsfeld), because none of them have the answers. Leadership, I say, at its very best; America’s finest hour!
"This is our 100th day since the major military operations have ended… [a]nd since then, we've made good progress. Iraq is more secure. The economy of Iraq is beginning to improve.
Really Mr. Accidental President? On the way to work this morning I heard a rather lengthy report on National Public Radio about the continuing problems with the Iraqi electrical grid. Looting and sabotage continue to fester as an issue. And so much copper is being smuggled out of Iraq and onto the world copper market, that it is beginning to effect world copper prices. Is this what Bush means by improvement? How then can the economy of Iraq be improving without a reliable electrical source(s)? And this is only one of the problems vexing American administrators fighting to bring Iraq under control.
Where is the end game; where is the exit strategy; when are the national elections; where is Saddam; when are American troops coming home? None of these questions, nor many others, will be answered by the Crawford tumbleweed trio (Bush, Cheney & Rumsfeld), because none of them have the answers. Leadership, I say, at its very best; America’s finest hour!
Wednesday, August 06, 2003
The Terminator Seeks to Erase Davis
Okay, now that Arnold S. is in, this could very well turn into a popularity contest where the real issues facing the state no longer matter. I have listened to, and read about Ms. Huffington’s views on the issues (local and national) and she makes sense where it counts. Can the same be said about Arnold S.? What are his views?
Arnold said on the Jay Leno show, to air tonight: “[t]he politicians are fiddling, fumbling and failing… [t]he man that is failing the people more than anyone is Gray Davis. He is failing them terribly, and this is why he needs to be recalled and this is why I am going to run for governor."
The big question is, however does Arnold S. have a keen enough grasp of the issues, and more importantly California politics to make a real difference, or like Bush—the Accidental President—will he come with strings attached to his extremities?
Arnold said on the Jay Leno show, to air tonight: “[t]he politicians are fiddling, fumbling and failing… [t]he man that is failing the people more than anyone is Gray Davis. He is failing them terribly, and this is why he needs to be recalled and this is why I am going to run for governor."
The big question is, however does Arnold S. have a keen enough grasp of the issues, and more importantly California politics to make a real difference, or like Bush—the Accidental President—will he come with strings attached to his extremities?
Huffington in, Springer out, Schwarzenegger: who really cares!
Its official, Arianna Hunffington, the virtual co-host of satirist Bill Maher’s “Real Time with Bill Maher” on HBO, is running for governor of the embattled state of California. Speaking in Los Angeles this morning, Huffington stated,
Meanwhile, Jerry Springer has decided not to run for Senator from the State of Ohio. Citing concerns about his image stemming from his less then upstanding talk show, Springer stated “I can’t do it at this time.” Pity for those of us who wanted to see American politics sink even lower into the pit of mediocrity!
One more tidbit of note: it is now an open secret that Arnold Schwarzenegger is expected to bow out (today as a matter of fact) of the governor’s race in California. Too bad, I was looking forward to hearing what the bodybuilder turned action hero, turned political wannabe had to say about the mess brewing in the nation most populace state.
I'm not, to say the least, a conventional candidate…[i]f we keep electing the same kind of politicians, we'll never get out of this mess.
Meanwhile, Jerry Springer has decided not to run for Senator from the State of Ohio. Citing concerns about his image stemming from his less then upstanding talk show, Springer stated “I can’t do it at this time.” Pity for those of us who wanted to see American politics sink even lower into the pit of mediocrity!
One more tidbit of note: it is now an open secret that Arnold Schwarzenegger is expected to bow out (today as a matter of fact) of the governor’s race in California. Too bad, I was looking forward to hearing what the bodybuilder turned action hero, turned political wannabe had to say about the mess brewing in the nation most populace state.
More on Clarence Thomas...
As the debate rages on in the Senate concerning the fitness of certain neo-conservative Bush nominations to serve on various federal District Courts and or Courts’ of Appeal, one that got by in the eighties, quietly serves. The Washington Post recently ran an involved article on Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, which shed new and disturbing light on the man, who according to some, might well become the next Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. The article only served to solidify my opinion of the man as out of touch with most of Americans in general and Black Americans in particular.
Sunday, August 03, 2003
Gov. Davis Endorses Illegal Immigrants Driver’s License Issuance
Does anyone but me think that it is batty and just down right bad public policy (not to mention a violation of U.S. law) to pander to illegal immigrants? Should they for instance be allowed to apply for and carry valid state driver’s licenses? I say no, but the governor of California in an obvious bid to keep his seat, says yes. Should the top law enforcement officer in the state, in effect, sanction lawlessness in search of a vote? The answer to the reasoned man is clear, but it appears as though reason, the rule of law, and common sense have all taken a back seat while democracy in its purest form runs amok to the point of subversion, in the nations most populace state. It’s a great day to be an American!
Thursday, July 31, 2003
Who Are They Kidding!?!?
So now that the Vatican, that bastion of moral, upright, uptight, sexually immature, red robed chumps have decided to launch a war against homosexual marriages. Umm, shouldn’t they be launching a worldwide campaign against child sexual assault and abuse within the church by priests? So let me get this straight, homosexuality is a sin, but sodomizing young boys and raping young girls is okay? Hello!!
Sunday, July 27, 2003
New School, New Beginning?
I’ve been accepted to DePaul University’s School of Computer Science, Telecommunications, & Information Systems as a Graduate student pursuing a Masters in Computer Science. I received the acceptance letter in the mail on Saturday. I should be high on the news, but strangely enough I am not. Perhaps it’s because there was no mystery here, I mean since I am a DePaul Alum, I figured I would be accepted. So, now I embark on yet another education adventure and spend more money I will eventually have to pay back, yippee!
Don’t get me wrong, I am somewhat excited about pursuing my Masters, but a very large part of me just want to be done with school; when will it ever be enough? Seems every time you achieve one milestone, they (whomever they is) pushes the bar higher, so that even more skills are needed to land a decent job!
Don’t get me wrong, I am somewhat excited about pursuing my Masters, but a very large part of me just want to be done with school; when will it ever be enough? Seems every time you achieve one milestone, they (whomever they is) pushes the bar higher, so that even more skills are needed to land a decent job!
The Shine is Starting to Dull on Ms. Rice' Crown
The Iraqi Intelligence Debacle continues to churn out victims, next up Connie Rice(?) I have never quite trusted Ms. Rice’s, judgment, or analysis because she is an academic with no “real-world" experience to draw upon. Theory alone should never be used to make decision about foreign policy, especially if the person theorizing has never put his/hers theories to the test. And her public statements have always been a little too smug, and “on-point” to merit much regard.
Saturday, July 26, 2003
In Search Democratic Party Leadership
I have been stymied by the Democratic Party’s lack of leadership and coherent platform. And as Bush’s “war-chest” grows daily, time marches on, and the Presidential election draws ever closer, there is still no clear democratic front-runner. It would seem I am not alone in my dismay over the Democrat’s disarray. If they do not get it together soon, they will have no one the blame—this time—for their failure to retake the White House, but the Party membership. Indeed the only embarrassment this election cycle is the Party itself.
GOP's Nasty Undemocratic Power Play
A decade after winning back the House of Representatives under the first Clinton Administration by promising brighter tomorrows and a “Contract with America,” the GOP has failed to deliver promised reforms. Is anyone surprised? Now that they are in power in the House, they seemed to have torn up the contract, (I wonder if we the American people, can sue them from breech of same?), and taken on decidedly unsavory tactics in a bid to exclude Democrats from all crucial decisions.
The GOP is fast becoming the party which represents a fringe of the American population, a party where neo-conservatism seems to flourish under the light the new American Imperialism, and where minorities (but only the darker ones), middle-class, and lower class Americans need not apply.
The GOP is fast becoming the party which represents a fringe of the American population, a party where neo-conservatism seems to flourish under the light the new American Imperialism, and where minorities (but only the darker ones), middle-class, and lower class Americans need not apply.
Friday, July 25, 2003
Ambush's on American Forces Continue Apace...
It would seem that the Iraqi resistance didn’t receive the fax, or email from Rumsfeld stating that they were suppose to stop ambushing American soldiers now that Uday and Qusay Hussein have been terminated with extreme prejudice. Three more American soldiers from 101st Airborne Division, died overnight in an attack on their convoy at approximately 2:30am (I thought we owned the night). Hopefully, the next week will see the cessation of attacks upon our soldiers as the fax lines are restored and emails finally get through!
Thursday, July 24, 2003
A Modicum of Sanity Returns to the House
Could sanity be returning to the House? Say it isn’t so; the interest of the American people put before those of special interests? The House voted 400 to 21 yesterday to block earlier imposed rules from the FCC that would have allowed the countries largest broadcasting concerns to snap up more television stations, setting up a potential showdown with the White House.
Monday, July 21, 2003
Law School Byebye
Well, I have been thinking about it for most of the summer and today I made up my mind and did it, I quit law school, it was proving to difficult to keep all of the ball rolling in the same direction. It was one of the hardest decisions I’ve ever made, but I felt I had to for the good of the family.
On an up note I registered for entry into the Masters program at DePauls’ College of Computer Science, Telecommunications, and Information Services. I hope to gain entrance into the Distance Learning Computer Science Program. This will allow me take classes at home and hopefully finish my Masters by the end of 2005(?).
On an up note I registered for entry into the Masters program at DePauls’ College of Computer Science, Telecommunications, and Information Services. I hope to gain entrance into the Distance Learning Computer Science Program. This will allow me take classes at home and hopefully finish my Masters by the end of 2005(?).
Thursday, July 17, 2003
What Form Reparations?
I have given considerable thought to the subject of reparations for slavery and its legacy of late, a lot of thought. I have tried to wrap my mind around that which is fast becoming a flash point of both personal and political debate; not only across the country, but in Hollywood as well. A recent episode of the West Wing (a very fine show) addressed the issue and touched upon some of its complexities. And complexities there are.
But let’s leave that aside for now and address the broader issue; should the nation’s Black American population be given monetary compensation in order to atone for the forced labor of their ancestors? My short answer would have to be no! Now ask the same question another way; should the nation’s Black American population be given monetary compensation in order to atone for the forced labor of their ancestors and the resulting legacy of inequality that prevented many Black Americans from achieving even the basic tenets of the American Dream? My short answer is a hedged no, leaning towards a, “let’s see what we can do” refrain! All of which of course brings us back to the complexities of the situation.
The tide of support for reparations is rising all across the nation as the issue comes once more out of the doldrums of back room chats over poker and angry dinner table discussions, into the mainstream of American politics. Former President Clinton went on record as saying that he is against both an apology for slavery and reparations for slavery (http://cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1997/06/17/clinton.race/). Bush predictably has not mentioned either the apology or reparations issue. Blackvoices.com, a premiere web site dedicated to Black American issues conducted a poll on the issue, in which overwhelming support was given to the idea of reparations. The results of the poll can be viewed here (http://www.blackvoices.com/feature/reparations/main.html). And the old forty acres and mule argument is resurfacing as H.R. 29 introduced by Thaddeus Stevens of Pennsylvania, on March 11, 1867, makes its voice heard once again. The complete text of the bill can be read here (http://www.directblackaction.com/rep_bills/hr29_1867.txt).
But what form should reparations take? Except for the Thaddeus Stevens bill, that question has never been intelligently addressed. Should the reparations take the form of cash, real estate, or a college/technical school endowment, or voucher program? And how do we pay for them; through a special tax on just White people? Hardly fair. A one-time tax deduction, or some other tax relief for Black Americans? Again, hardly fair from a number of perspectives. And most importantly, how to craft the reparations so that they will be easy for all American to swallow (no mean feat I assure you!), or at least come to terms with?
And how does the government insure that only those directly descended from slavery receive reparations? Aside from the question addressed in the previous paragraph, this is undeniably the most vexing to answer.
Here are some thoughts. First, what form should reparations take? I think the reparations, if given, should take the form of educational vouchers to the school or technical institute of their choice for those Black Americans seeking a Technical, Vocational, Associates, Bachelor’s, Masters, or PhD degree. This not only helps Black Americans (especially Black American males) lift themselves out of poverty, but also helps the country as a whole. How you might ask? By assuring that a steady stream of highly educated and motivated individuals will join the work force well into this century as America continues to shift its economy away from heavy industry into high tech and the service industry. Any Black American alive when the bill is passed would be eligible and assured at least four years of study at an institution of higher learning, or technical program. And for those who have already completed their degrees, any and all outstanding student loans would be forgiven. The aforementioned would be the sole form(s) of reparations offered: no money, no cars, no land, and no houses.
Eligibility would be determined using census data from the latest census to determine heritage. Those Black Americans, who turned in their census forms and identified themselves, as Black Americans no matter what age, or social status, would be eligible for reparations. Census data currently on hand would be verified by home visits by census officials.
The only question left is funding. I am no economist, or self proclaimed expert on government funding, but I think a .5% to 1% hike in the corporate tax rate, along with a .25% tax on luxury items costing over $300,000 should be enough to fund the program, given the current state of the U.S. economy. In this way corporate America and the richest 1% of Americans give back to the country that gave them so much!
Good idea, or is there room for improvement? Or am I totally out to lunch? I don’t think so! The writing is on the wall; this issue will not go away and will no long stay under the rug where it has been brushed lo these past 135 years. If we are going to do justice to the past by addressing reparations for slavery and its legacy, why not do so with an eye on the future of our nation as a whole? An educated person is one of hope in the future and its promise of a brighter tomorrow. Education is now and will forever be the slayer of ignorance and the harbinger of hope. Let’s not waste yet another opportunity to enrich our nation and secure her future status by yet again turning our collective backs on her Black citizens.
I have given considerable thought to the subject of reparations for slavery and its legacy of late, a lot of thought. I have tried to wrap my mind around that which is fast becoming a flash point of both personal and political debate; not only across the country, but in Hollywood as well. A recent episode of the West Wing (a very fine show) addressed the issue and touched upon some of its complexities. And complexities there are.
But let’s leave that aside for now and address the broader issue; should the nation’s Black American population be given monetary compensation in order to atone for the forced labor of their ancestors? My short answer would have to be no! Now ask the same question another way; should the nation’s Black American population be given monetary compensation in order to atone for the forced labor of their ancestors and the resulting legacy of inequality that prevented many Black Americans from achieving even the basic tenets of the American Dream? My short answer is a hedged no, leaning towards a, “let’s see what we can do” refrain! All of which of course brings us back to the complexities of the situation.
The tide of support for reparations is rising all across the nation as the issue comes once more out of the doldrums of back room chats over poker and angry dinner table discussions, into the mainstream of American politics. Former President Clinton went on record as saying that he is against both an apology for slavery and reparations for slavery (http://cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1997/06/17/clinton.race/). Bush predictably has not mentioned either the apology or reparations issue. Blackvoices.com, a premiere web site dedicated to Black American issues conducted a poll on the issue, in which overwhelming support was given to the idea of reparations. The results of the poll can be viewed here (http://www.blackvoices.com/feature/reparations/main.html). And the old forty acres and mule argument is resurfacing as H.R. 29 introduced by Thaddeus Stevens of Pennsylvania, on March 11, 1867, makes its voice heard once again. The complete text of the bill can be read here (http://www.directblackaction.com/rep_bills/hr29_1867.txt).
But what form should reparations take? Except for the Thaddeus Stevens bill, that question has never been intelligently addressed. Should the reparations take the form of cash, real estate, or a college/technical school endowment, or voucher program? And how do we pay for them; through a special tax on just White people? Hardly fair. A one-time tax deduction, or some other tax relief for Black Americans? Again, hardly fair from a number of perspectives. And most importantly, how to craft the reparations so that they will be easy for all American to swallow (no mean feat I assure you!), or at least come to terms with?
And how does the government insure that only those directly descended from slavery receive reparations? Aside from the question addressed in the previous paragraph, this is undeniably the most vexing to answer.
Here are some thoughts. First, what form should reparations take? I think the reparations, if given, should take the form of educational vouchers to the school or technical institute of their choice for those Black Americans seeking a Technical, Vocational, Associates, Bachelor’s, Masters, or PhD degree. This not only helps Black Americans (especially Black American males) lift themselves out of poverty, but also helps the country as a whole. How you might ask? By assuring that a steady stream of highly educated and motivated individuals will join the work force well into this century as America continues to shift its economy away from heavy industry into high tech and the service industry. Any Black American alive when the bill is passed would be eligible and assured at least four years of study at an institution of higher learning, or technical program. And for those who have already completed their degrees, any and all outstanding student loans would be forgiven. The aforementioned would be the sole form(s) of reparations offered: no money, no cars, no land, and no houses.
Eligibility would be determined using census data from the latest census to determine heritage. Those Black Americans, who turned in their census forms and identified themselves, as Black Americans no matter what age, or social status, would be eligible for reparations. Census data currently on hand would be verified by home visits by census officials.
The only question left is funding. I am no economist, or self proclaimed expert on government funding, but I think a .5% to 1% hike in the corporate tax rate, along with a .25% tax on luxury items costing over $300,000 should be enough to fund the program, given the current state of the U.S. economy. In this way corporate America and the richest 1% of Americans give back to the country that gave them so much!
Good idea, or is there room for improvement? Or am I totally out to lunch? I don’t think so! The writing is on the wall; this issue will not go away and will no long stay under the rug where it has been brushed lo these past 135 years. If we are going to do justice to the past by addressing reparations for slavery and its legacy, why not do so with an eye on the future of our nation as a whole? An educated person is one of hope in the future and its promise of a brighter tomorrow. Education is now and will forever be the slayer of ignorance and the harbinger of hope. Let’s not waste yet another opportunity to enrich our nation and secure her future status by yet again turning our collective backs on her Black citizens.
Apology for the Legacy of Slavery
Apology: an expression of regret for an offense or fault.
On May 17th 2000, the mayor of the America’s third largest city, Chicago, made a public apology to the Black Americans in his city for slavery.
After tiptoeing around the issue for weeks, Mayor Richard Daley on Wednesday came out squarely in favor of reparations for the descendants of African slaves and asserted it is only right for America to say it is sorry for what it did. "You apologize for a wrong," Daley declared. "Slavery was wrong. ... Slavery has had an enormous effect on generation after generation." The mayor's comments came as the City Council voted overwhelmingly to urge Congress to consider reparations. - Chicago Tribune, May 17, 2000, Chicago Illinois
Chicago is just the latest city in a growing list of cities across the nation that has joined the cry for Congress to address the issue of an apology and reparations (the question of reparations will be addressed next month in another article), for slavery. Most White Americans—and quite a few non-white American’s, chief among them, Native Americans—have opposed the call for an apology, asserting that it was not they who were responsible for slavery. Or they assert their forefathers were immigrants, or migrant workers, or indentured servants, and therefore not responsible for slavery and all of it well documented ills.
Let’s leave aside for a moment those individual arguments and address the larger issue: should the United States Government apology for slavery? I say no, not for slavery alone. It should instead apologize for the legacy that slavery left in its wake; a legacy I hasten to point out that the U.S. government helped endow, and fed through its own well documented institutionalized brand of discrimination, bigotry, and racism. It is the legacy of slavery that has haunted every Black American—man, woman, and child—for the last 135 years, and the haunting continues to this day!
All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws-14th Amendment to The Constitution of the United States of America, ratified July 9th 1868.
Citizens yes, equal under the law; in theory yes, but in reality, NO. For some 100 years after the end of slavery, the federal government was a co-equal partner in the systematic denial of Black American’s equal treatment under the law. There has been case after case, after case in which Black Americans were humiliated before the eyes of the world, denied, disrespected, set upon. And they were murdered by gun and rope, raped, blown up, and treated like second class citizens under the watchful eye of all three branches of the federal government. A federal government, which gave its support to this vile treatment by either doing nothing to stop it, or acted in concert with those who would seek to promote and champion racism and discrimination.
This against the backdrop of The Declaration of Independence and The Constitution, the very words of which speak like no other document, before or since, to the human need to be free of the shackles of oppression, tyranny, and injustice! I have often wondered how forward thinking classically, or liberally educated persons who claim the word of God as their own, can come to terms in their minds, hearts, and souls with the very obvious contradictions and ethical, moral, and spiritual dilemma’s this paradox creates.
If, and I say again, if the federal government had upheld the Constitution and believed in the spirit and the letter of the Declaration of Independence and in so doing vigorously enforced the law from the outset (end of the Civil War), how different today would America be?
Would Jim Crow laws have been enacted and enforced in the south for close to 100 years? Would the KKK have ever become the force for evil, hatred, intolerance, and bigotry it became? Would Black family’s be torn asunder and Black children—especially Black boys—feel hopeless and rudderless, finding no cause in America to call their own? Would the American dream remain but a dream for so many disenfranchised Black Americans? Would the Black Panthers ever have been born? Would the race riots of the sixties have ever flared? Would Martin Luther King Jr. and countless other Blacks and Whites have lost their lives in a struggle to bring equality to a people who should have already been enjoying its fruits? Would the deep biting pain of school desegregation and forced busing have been necessary to enrich young Black minds that heretofore had gone undernourished by the blatant indifference of the many states? Would the Voting Rights Act or Civil Rights Act have been necessary? Would affirmative action and the entire ugly debate it invites have been necessary in our nation’s corporations and schools of higher learning? Would we today be talking of reparations and apology’s if the federal government had lived up to it obligation and responsibility’s to uphold the law fairly and equally for all its citizens? And in so doing binding the many States to their collective and individual obligations and responsibility’s to do the same? I think the answer to all of those questions is a resounding NO!
Apologize for slavery in and of itself, NO, because the federal government, indeed the country was not even in existence when slavery was introduced to the thirteen colonies. Apologize for allowing slavery’s legacy, a legacy born of hatred, racism, and intolerance, which it helped, foster, YES! An apology for that and the incalculable pain and emotional scaring it caused is in order and dually demanded! A nation of the people, by the people and for the people, should not tolerate the continued subjugation and unequal treatment of ANY of the people!
Apology: an expression of regret for an offense or fault.
On May 17th 2000, the mayor of the America’s third largest city, Chicago, made a public apology to the Black Americans in his city for slavery.
After tiptoeing around the issue for weeks, Mayor Richard Daley on Wednesday came out squarely in favor of reparations for the descendants of African slaves and asserted it is only right for America to say it is sorry for what it did. "You apologize for a wrong," Daley declared. "Slavery was wrong. ... Slavery has had an enormous effect on generation after generation." The mayor's comments came as the City Council voted overwhelmingly to urge Congress to consider reparations. - Chicago Tribune, May 17, 2000, Chicago Illinois
Chicago is just the latest city in a growing list of cities across the nation that has joined the cry for Congress to address the issue of an apology and reparations (the question of reparations will be addressed next month in another article), for slavery. Most White Americans—and quite a few non-white American’s, chief among them, Native Americans—have opposed the call for an apology, asserting that it was not they who were responsible for slavery. Or they assert their forefathers were immigrants, or migrant workers, or indentured servants, and therefore not responsible for slavery and all of it well documented ills.
Let’s leave aside for a moment those individual arguments and address the larger issue: should the United States Government apology for slavery? I say no, not for slavery alone. It should instead apologize for the legacy that slavery left in its wake; a legacy I hasten to point out that the U.S. government helped endow, and fed through its own well documented institutionalized brand of discrimination, bigotry, and racism. It is the legacy of slavery that has haunted every Black American—man, woman, and child—for the last 135 years, and the haunting continues to this day!
All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws-14th Amendment to The Constitution of the United States of America, ratified July 9th 1868.
Citizens yes, equal under the law; in theory yes, but in reality, NO. For some 100 years after the end of slavery, the federal government was a co-equal partner in the systematic denial of Black American’s equal treatment under the law. There has been case after case, after case in which Black Americans were humiliated before the eyes of the world, denied, disrespected, set upon. And they were murdered by gun and rope, raped, blown up, and treated like second class citizens under the watchful eye of all three branches of the federal government. A federal government, which gave its support to this vile treatment by either doing nothing to stop it, or acted in concert with those who would seek to promote and champion racism and discrimination.
This against the backdrop of The Declaration of Independence and The Constitution, the very words of which speak like no other document, before or since, to the human need to be free of the shackles of oppression, tyranny, and injustice! I have often wondered how forward thinking classically, or liberally educated persons who claim the word of God as their own, can come to terms in their minds, hearts, and souls with the very obvious contradictions and ethical, moral, and spiritual dilemma’s this paradox creates.
If, and I say again, if the federal government had upheld the Constitution and believed in the spirit and the letter of the Declaration of Independence and in so doing vigorously enforced the law from the outset (end of the Civil War), how different today would America be?
Would Jim Crow laws have been enacted and enforced in the south for close to 100 years? Would the KKK have ever become the force for evil, hatred, intolerance, and bigotry it became? Would Black family’s be torn asunder and Black children—especially Black boys—feel hopeless and rudderless, finding no cause in America to call their own? Would the American dream remain but a dream for so many disenfranchised Black Americans? Would the Black Panthers ever have been born? Would the race riots of the sixties have ever flared? Would Martin Luther King Jr. and countless other Blacks and Whites have lost their lives in a struggle to bring equality to a people who should have already been enjoying its fruits? Would the deep biting pain of school desegregation and forced busing have been necessary to enrich young Black minds that heretofore had gone undernourished by the blatant indifference of the many states? Would the Voting Rights Act or Civil Rights Act have been necessary? Would affirmative action and the entire ugly debate it invites have been necessary in our nation’s corporations and schools of higher learning? Would we today be talking of reparations and apology’s if the federal government had lived up to it obligation and responsibility’s to uphold the law fairly and equally for all its citizens? And in so doing binding the many States to their collective and individual obligations and responsibility’s to do the same? I think the answer to all of those questions is a resounding NO!
Apologize for slavery in and of itself, NO, because the federal government, indeed the country was not even in existence when slavery was introduced to the thirteen colonies. Apologize for allowing slavery’s legacy, a legacy born of hatred, racism, and intolerance, which it helped, foster, YES! An apology for that and the incalculable pain and emotional scaring it caused is in order and dually demanded! A nation of the people, by the people and for the people, should not tolerate the continued subjugation and unequal treatment of ANY of the people!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)