Glenn Beck Calls for Shirley Sherrod’s Reinstatement
Can you believe it? FOX commentator Glenn Beck is calling for Shirley Sherrod, former USD administrator, dismissed for comments taken out of context by a conservative blogger.
It seems that FOX News and Commentators speak with forked tongues. Only yesterday, it seems, that FOX commentator Bill O’Reilly was calling for her crucifixion.
All content taken from The O'Reilly Factor on Fox News Channel. Each weeknight by 6 PM EST a preview of that evening's show will be posted and then updated with additional information the following weekday by noon EST.
Another Obama official forced out
"As we told you last night, Department of Agriculture official Shirley Sherrod admitted that years ago she held back some government assistance to a white farmer because of the color of his skin. After hearing that I said 'Ms. Sherrod must resign immediately,' and that's exactly what happened. But if you were watching the network news last night you would know nothing about the story. Once again, an embarrassing moment for the Obama administration was not covered. In the big picture this is a small story; every administration has had employees do dumb things. But why the news blackout when things become unpleasant for the Obama administration? The answer has to be bias - the establishment press tilts left and is reluctant to do damage to a very liberal president. There's no other reason to spike stories that bring millions of viewers to Fox News. You would think the other TV news operations, all of whom are not doing well, would want to attract that large audience. Apparently they don't."
Source: http://www.billoreilly.com/show?action=viewTVShow&showID=2649
Didn’t this same FOX News Report issue this story as BREAKING NEWS?
Sure! Breaking News: An innocent black woman is lynched by crafty racist deception: FOX News.
Beck calls for Shirley Sherrod to be reinstated.
Too late, Shirley is a martyr like Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., whose character was assassinated long before he died.
If I were Shirley, I would not go back until America hangs her head in shame, for this mass rush to judgment. In the meantime, she should sue the Agriculture Department for wrongful termination.
There is someone out there retrieving old black video tapes, doctoring them, and create hysteric fears and racial animosities, INTENTIONALLY (Willfully), for purposes other than what is publically known, subversive, spread throughout the television network airways of FOX.
[Isn’t this an FCC issue?]
So much for truth in journalism: THE SPIN STOPS HERE
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Tea Party Invitation to NAACP for Summit
As an ambassador of good will and advocate of human rights, I always welcome the opportunity for peace and understanding between people, races, and nations. Therefore, I welcome the olive branch extended by David Webb, co-founder of TeaParty365, who appeared on CBS “Face the Nation” on Sunday. He proposes a Tea Summit on Race Relation, in response to the NAACP resolution against racism within the Tea Party movement.
NAACP President Benjamin Jealous, according to the Wall Street Journal report, was “open to the idea”. He wishes, however, that such a forum should address issues other than race.
Even so, I would welcome the idea of holding a joint town hall meeting, as proposed by Webb, on any terms, for the sake of putting animosities behind us.
NOTE: David Webb is African-American, the same as Benjamin Jealous. And, it appears that only the African-American members of the Tea Party are willing to step forward to deal with racism within the organization. The rests seems more inclined to find a fault with the NAACP and spin cases or instances of “black racism”, to counter the damage done to the party's image.
Nevertheless, there has been progress since the release of the resolution. The North Iowa Tea Party billboard in Mason City, depicting President Barack Obama as Hitler, has been taken down and replaced with a public service announcement. Tea Party Express activist Mark Williams has been expelled from the Tea Party Federation for a demeaning racial satire posted on his website.
These corrections in organizational behavior clears the way for people of good will to move forward toward racial reconciliation, and yet with freedom to air our legitimate political differences.
“There is no debate about racism,” says Jealous. I agree.
Some people would go tit-for-tat on instances of racial bigotry, both white bigotry and black bigotry. And, some African-Americans would fend that they have been more assailed with white racism since the founding of this nation, and point out slavery and lynching and violent oppression and white terrorism, as proof.
These arguments rub raw the wrong way. To get caught up in tit-for-tat acrimony would be fruitless. However, beware that it is the only term with which some can discuss the issue.
Therefore, my advice to the NAACP would be to accept the Tea Party’s invitation to a summit with grace and dignity. Take the high road and not condescend to tit-for-tat on bigotry. Remember: Racial bigotry is only the outward expression of a subjective idea. In this case, when we speak of racism, we speak of the ideology of white supremacy and the discriminatory and prejudicial practices that grow out of it, and how the state apparatus becomes an institution of oppression by it. Everything else is a diversion.
Give all due respect to your adversary, remembering that the bigot is not the enemy, but a victim of a misguided idea. The enemy is the foundation of ideas that lead to hateful and prejudicial behavior. Study from whence these ideas of white supremacy come and how they innocuously and subtly interject into today’s political arena.
FOR EXAMPLE: Tea Party Express activist Mark Williams, in his satire, insinuated that black people were lazy, shiftless, and irresponsible. Needless to say, this is a popular idea within the movement, and forms the basis of why some people think that the government is taking their hard earned wealth and giving to an unworthy group of people.
It is also a popular idea that providing poor and unemployed people with welfare (or "extended unemployment") creates a disincentive to work, and such assistance, such as free food stamps encourages "welfare mothers" to reproduces.
These are very old ideas, dating back to the debate on English Poor Laws in 1536. In 1834, when another round of Poor Laws was introduced, Thomas Malthus, the father of birth control and family planning, opposed the new laws for the very same reasons listed above: that it would encourage the poor to become lazy, irresponsible, reproduce like rabbits, and eventually become a burden on the state.
Today, we have code words like “welfare state”, “entitlement programs”, “socialized medicine”, all with the same underlying meaning that hard working Americans are being robbed by the government to support lazy and irresponsible welfare recipients. Unfortunately, the modern day stereotype is not the British poor, but poor minorities, the faces of which are mostly black.
Thomas Malthus’ “An Essay on the Principal of Population” (1798-1826) was a series on political economy based upon population growth of the “unworthy” people, who would overpopulate the world and consume more food than the earth could produce. The solution was to cut off support for the lazy poor, keep wages at subsistence level, and put malaria in the water of African natives. In short, let the “unworthy” population die off, by natural attrition and haste.
The current debate over government spending is primarily aimed at the programs that helped the poor, unemployed, and aged. The arguments are the same now, as in 1834. Technically, this is not racism, until combined with the goals and aspirations of white supremacy.
In rebuking the NAACP for its resolution, a FOX commentator questioned if the black community did not have enough problems for its organization, such as poverty, unemployment, teen pregnancy, crime, etc.
Somehow, we assumed that these were common problems to America as a whole, not just an isolated group or race of people. To say that these are black problems, instead of America’s problems, puts the onerous African-Americans to build bricks without straw (as in, no government help or assistance). The above arguments stymatizes helping the poor and undeserving. Instead of a theme of Saving America, we see slogans like Save White America in the Tea Party movement.
This is what divides us: that we are not One Nation, but a nation of competing interests along the color line. There must be reconciliation beyond the color of a person’s skin, and one community's problem must be looked upon as a problem for the nation, as a whole.
NAACP President Benjamin Jealous, according to the Wall Street Journal report, was “open to the idea”. He wishes, however, that such a forum should address issues other than race.
Even so, I would welcome the idea of holding a joint town hall meeting, as proposed by Webb, on any terms, for the sake of putting animosities behind us.
NOTE: David Webb is African-American, the same as Benjamin Jealous. And, it appears that only the African-American members of the Tea Party are willing to step forward to deal with racism within the organization. The rests seems more inclined to find a fault with the NAACP and spin cases or instances of “black racism”, to counter the damage done to the party's image.
Nevertheless, there has been progress since the release of the resolution. The North Iowa Tea Party billboard in Mason City, depicting President Barack Obama as Hitler, has been taken down and replaced with a public service announcement. Tea Party Express activist Mark Williams has been expelled from the Tea Party Federation for a demeaning racial satire posted on his website.
These corrections in organizational behavior clears the way for people of good will to move forward toward racial reconciliation, and yet with freedom to air our legitimate political differences.
“There is no debate about racism,” says Jealous. I agree.
Some people would go tit-for-tat on instances of racial bigotry, both white bigotry and black bigotry. And, some African-Americans would fend that they have been more assailed with white racism since the founding of this nation, and point out slavery and lynching and violent oppression and white terrorism, as proof.
These arguments rub raw the wrong way. To get caught up in tit-for-tat acrimony would be fruitless. However, beware that it is the only term with which some can discuss the issue.
Therefore, my advice to the NAACP would be to accept the Tea Party’s invitation to a summit with grace and dignity. Take the high road and not condescend to tit-for-tat on bigotry. Remember: Racial bigotry is only the outward expression of a subjective idea. In this case, when we speak of racism, we speak of the ideology of white supremacy and the discriminatory and prejudicial practices that grow out of it, and how the state apparatus becomes an institution of oppression by it. Everything else is a diversion.
Give all due respect to your adversary, remembering that the bigot is not the enemy, but a victim of a misguided idea. The enemy is the foundation of ideas that lead to hateful and prejudicial behavior. Study from whence these ideas of white supremacy come and how they innocuously and subtly interject into today’s political arena.
FOR EXAMPLE: Tea Party Express activist Mark Williams, in his satire, insinuated that black people were lazy, shiftless, and irresponsible. Needless to say, this is a popular idea within the movement, and forms the basis of why some people think that the government is taking their hard earned wealth and giving to an unworthy group of people.
It is also a popular idea that providing poor and unemployed people with welfare (or "extended unemployment") creates a disincentive to work, and such assistance, such as free food stamps encourages "welfare mothers" to reproduces.
These are very old ideas, dating back to the debate on English Poor Laws in 1536. In 1834, when another round of Poor Laws was introduced, Thomas Malthus, the father of birth control and family planning, opposed the new laws for the very same reasons listed above: that it would encourage the poor to become lazy, irresponsible, reproduce like rabbits, and eventually become a burden on the state.
Today, we have code words like “welfare state”, “entitlement programs”, “socialized medicine”, all with the same underlying meaning that hard working Americans are being robbed by the government to support lazy and irresponsible welfare recipients. Unfortunately, the modern day stereotype is not the British poor, but poor minorities, the faces of which are mostly black.
Thomas Malthus’ “An Essay on the Principal of Population” (1798-1826) was a series on political economy based upon population growth of the “unworthy” people, who would overpopulate the world and consume more food than the earth could produce. The solution was to cut off support for the lazy poor, keep wages at subsistence level, and put malaria in the water of African natives. In short, let the “unworthy” population die off, by natural attrition and haste.
The current debate over government spending is primarily aimed at the programs that helped the poor, unemployed, and aged. The arguments are the same now, as in 1834. Technically, this is not racism, until combined with the goals and aspirations of white supremacy.
In rebuking the NAACP for its resolution, a FOX commentator questioned if the black community did not have enough problems for its organization, such as poverty, unemployment, teen pregnancy, crime, etc.
Somehow, we assumed that these were common problems to America as a whole, not just an isolated group or race of people. To say that these are black problems, instead of America’s problems, puts the onerous African-Americans to build bricks without straw (as in, no government help or assistance). The above arguments stymatizes helping the poor and undeserving. Instead of a theme of Saving America, we see slogans like Save White America in the Tea Party movement.
This is what divides us: that we are not One Nation, but a nation of competing interests along the color line. There must be reconciliation beyond the color of a person’s skin, and one community's problem must be looked upon as a problem for the nation, as a whole.
Monday, July 19, 2010
Mason City Billboard Controversy:
Last Word
By Eddie Griffin
Monday, July 19, 2010
I must desist in this insane deliberation over character assassination of the president as whether by slander or racism.
What I want to know is why so many people believe that black people are lazy, living off government welfare and handouts, and why so many middle class African-Americans believe the same.
After all, the call for reduction in federal spending is, in fact, aimed at federal social welfare programs, which some believe is the preferred domain of poor black people. They forget federal assistance programs like food stamps actually subsidize rural farmers and agribusiness, stabilize food prices, and give U.S. farmers a guaranteed market. This is why farm goods outside of the country cannot compete. [NOTE: Unfortunately, the government did not buy black farm products; hence, black farmers starved, while their counterparts thrived on the Agriculture Department purchases].
All things being fair and equal
Recently, I heard people in Louisiana, in the aftermath of the BP disaster, talking about not wanting a government “handout”, and a lady boohooing her eyes out because this was her first time receiving food stamps.
Why does such humiliation and shame come from receiving handouts and food stamps?
Federal assistance programs are a stigma of poverty, laziness, depravity, low life style, and no motivation to do better. The stigma applies to both the “poor white trash” and “laziness Negro”. In order for a person to receive handout, food stamps, and welfare, they could only be one or the other. When it happens to middle-America, they differentiate themselves from the former.
That is why some Louisiana shrimpers refuse to take a “handout”. They take pride in being hard workers, and it is not right for people willing to work to receive government handouts like the undeserving who are not willing to work.
Here is the clincher: Somebody is selling the notion that President Barack Obama is taking their hard earned wealth and giving over to these undeserving lazy Negroes, simply because he favors black over white.
They call this a transfer of wealth by socialism.
Stupid is what stupid believes.
There is only one economy, neither black, nor white. It was the Department of Agriculture that first gave white U.S. farmers subsidies to grow and subsidies to forebear, in order to support the rural agrarian economy, and stabilize farm prices. But the Food Stamp Act of 1964, under President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty, appeared to benefit the lazily class of people.
This microcosmic chain: From rural farmland, to the government, to welfare recipients, is skewed to make it appear that blacks are the chief reliant upon this system.
They are Unemployed by Choice.
The government disperses it money through contracts, for example in the defense industries. Most of the jobs in these industries are skilled and primarily white labor, from machine to floor supervisor on up, the chain of hierarchy is like nepotism along racial lines. High unemployment among minorities does not signify lack of motivation but bias preference in hiring. In Texas, for example, in the defense industry, African-Americans are only hired to fulfill a federally required quota; otherwise, there would be no blacks working at all, as it had in the past, except sweep floors and taking out the trash. [Who gets the hot dirty jobs of scooping up the tar balls on the gulf beaches?]
There is an argument employers should have the right to hire whomsoever they will. But they forgot from whence come their federal contracts, and all federal monies come from a mixture of all segments and races in the country. When government spending is concentrated on a favored population, the rest is disfavored is the wealth distribution chain.
For centuries, they took black tax dollars and applied these dollars to the white economy, in the form of jobs and neighborhood development, such as streets and sidewalks. Negro neighborhoods did not receive equity for their tax dollars until they gained the vote and exercised political power en masse.
Nevertheless, once having taking all the choicest jobs, monopolized the training, skills, certifications, and licenses, at the exclusion of the Negro, it guaranteed another generation of ignorance and poverty.
Reducing Taxation does not mean a reduction in spending in those vital industries like the defense industry. Nor, does it mean reduction of federal spending in research, at predominately white colleges and universities. Nor, does it mean reduction federal spending in engineering and construction.
Reduction in taxes means to “take back” what is being given to the “undeserving” like welfare cheats and ACORN. It does not mean taking back subsidies to the railroad industries. [Notice the contrast in the color of the workforce on each end, and which labor force is productive and which a siphon].
The Equal Employment Opportunity Act is a federal law that does not necessarily change the sentiments of men’s hearts and their preferences in certain geographic regions. In the Deep South, a contractor or employer can say that they can find no “qualified applicant” in order to be exempt from the law.
This too is racist.
By Eddie Griffin
Monday, July 19, 2010
I must desist in this insane deliberation over character assassination of the president as whether by slander or racism.
What I want to know is why so many people believe that black people are lazy, living off government welfare and handouts, and why so many middle class African-Americans believe the same.
After all, the call for reduction in federal spending is, in fact, aimed at federal social welfare programs, which some believe is the preferred domain of poor black people. They forget federal assistance programs like food stamps actually subsidize rural farmers and agribusiness, stabilize food prices, and give U.S. farmers a guaranteed market. This is why farm goods outside of the country cannot compete. [NOTE: Unfortunately, the government did not buy black farm products; hence, black farmers starved, while their counterparts thrived on the Agriculture Department purchases].
All things being fair and equal
Recently, I heard people in Louisiana, in the aftermath of the BP disaster, talking about not wanting a government “handout”, and a lady boohooing her eyes out because this was her first time receiving food stamps.
Why does such humiliation and shame come from receiving handouts and food stamps?
Federal assistance programs are a stigma of poverty, laziness, depravity, low life style, and no motivation to do better. The stigma applies to both the “poor white trash” and “laziness Negro”. In order for a person to receive handout, food stamps, and welfare, they could only be one or the other. When it happens to middle-America, they differentiate themselves from the former.
That is why some Louisiana shrimpers refuse to take a “handout”. They take pride in being hard workers, and it is not right for people willing to work to receive government handouts like the undeserving who are not willing to work.
Here is the clincher: Somebody is selling the notion that President Barack Obama is taking their hard earned wealth and giving over to these undeserving lazy Negroes, simply because he favors black over white.
They call this a transfer of wealth by socialism.
Stupid is what stupid believes.
There is only one economy, neither black, nor white. It was the Department of Agriculture that first gave white U.S. farmers subsidies to grow and subsidies to forebear, in order to support the rural agrarian economy, and stabilize farm prices. But the Food Stamp Act of 1964, under President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty, appeared to benefit the lazily class of people.
This microcosmic chain: From rural farmland, to the government, to welfare recipients, is skewed to make it appear that blacks are the chief reliant upon this system.
They are Unemployed by Choice.
The government disperses it money through contracts, for example in the defense industries. Most of the jobs in these industries are skilled and primarily white labor, from machine to floor supervisor on up, the chain of hierarchy is like nepotism along racial lines. High unemployment among minorities does not signify lack of motivation but bias preference in hiring. In Texas, for example, in the defense industry, African-Americans are only hired to fulfill a federally required quota; otherwise, there would be no blacks working at all, as it had in the past, except sweep floors and taking out the trash. [Who gets the hot dirty jobs of scooping up the tar balls on the gulf beaches?]
There is an argument employers should have the right to hire whomsoever they will. But they forgot from whence come their federal contracts, and all federal monies come from a mixture of all segments and races in the country. When government spending is concentrated on a favored population, the rest is disfavored is the wealth distribution chain.
For centuries, they took black tax dollars and applied these dollars to the white economy, in the form of jobs and neighborhood development, such as streets and sidewalks. Negro neighborhoods did not receive equity for their tax dollars until they gained the vote and exercised political power en masse.
Nevertheless, once having taking all the choicest jobs, monopolized the training, skills, certifications, and licenses, at the exclusion of the Negro, it guaranteed another generation of ignorance and poverty.
Reducing Taxation does not mean a reduction in spending in those vital industries like the defense industry. Nor, does it mean reduction of federal spending in research, at predominately white colleges and universities. Nor, does it mean reduction federal spending in engineering and construction.
Reduction in taxes means to “take back” what is being given to the “undeserving” like welfare cheats and ACORN. It does not mean taking back subsidies to the railroad industries. [Notice the contrast in the color of the workforce on each end, and which labor force is productive and which a siphon].
The Equal Employment Opportunity Act is a federal law that does not necessarily change the sentiments of men’s hearts and their preferences in certain geographic regions. In the Deep South, a contractor or employer can say that they can find no “qualified applicant” in order to be exempt from the law.
This too is racist.
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Where is the Racism in the Tea Party?
By Eddie Griffin
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Some people are questioning the resolution of the NAACP about racism in the Tea Party- a resolution, mind you, that still has to be finalized. But when NAACP President Benjamin Jealous spoke about the resolution, there were clearly despicable pictures in the background as proof of what he meant.
NO, not everybody in the Tea Party is racist, and I doubt if many really understand what racism truly means outside of bigotry. This is why I stopped using the term “racism” to describe “white supremacy”- the ideology of “white rule”, either by natural divine right or intellectual superiority. Most bigots fall on the low end of the IQ pool, easily aroused, dumped, and hoodwinked, by their more intelligent counterparts.
In an article in the Fort Worth Weekly, I forewarned that “unhealthy rhetoric” coming from the ranks of the Tea Party was comparable to the racist rhetoric hurled at African-Americans during the Civil Rights Movement. (See “Unhealthy Rhetoric” by Eddie Griffin, Fort Worth Weekly, March 31, 2010). Instead of toning down the hostilities, some readers unleashed their anger upon me as the writer and demanded proof.
I presented a montage of pictures to the editor Gayle Reeves, which was later included in an editorial, “Tea Parties, Racism and Eddie Griffin”. As I asserted in the original article: “Plausible denial is a racist’s chief defense. That nobody saw him, nobody heard him, and nobody can prove what is in his heart is all the cover he needs.”
The YouTube link to Gayle’s editorial has been disconnected (for obvious or unobvious reasons), but the montage is picture proof is here, and here is why these depictions are racially offensive:
(1:34-1:43) A poster read: Save White America
What is “White America”? How is it different from “Other America”? Why the implied dichotomy between White and Black America? Why must I accept the unscientific codification of Race based on skin color? And, why does “White America” feel imperiled and the rest of us do not? There are no white people, per se, only people who are spoofed into believing genetic and pigmentation means something.
Politics is colorless, but not odorless.
(1:17-1:34) A poster read: Slave Owner Taxpayer - Niggar
By civil convention, I thought the N-word was antiquated due its vile nature and hateful conjuring. But here is a man, in patriotic red, white, and blue, with this sign.
(2:06-2:14) A poster read: Obama is the Antichrist – Oust Obama
(4:00-4:09) A poster read: The Antichrist is living in the White House
When people use religion to vilify the president in a demonic way, he or she intentionally corrupts the scriptures, as if there is no respect for the true and living God in heaven, or the leader elected by the majority of the people.
What does this say of those of us who voted for Obama? That we are satanic?
(2:39-2:47) A poster with an image of Barack Obama half-dressed in savage garb with a bone in his nose.
The image is reminiscent of pictures I remember as a child during 1940s and 1950s when we realized our African roots. We were brainwashed into shame about our heritage by these very same pictures. But there were Negro actors willing to portray such roles on stage and in movies.
We were taught that Africans were always uncivilized and dressed like this, not the fact that Africa was colonized, raped and pillaged, carved up like a pork chop, and the people thrown back into the stone ages by European encroachment. In time we discover Timbuktu and the cradle of civilization, and that Africa gave the Greeks their education, and Moors gave the world the Arabic number system.
It took a life time to overcome this shame, and now it returns in this form.
(2:47-2:55) A poster with a cartoon monkey with the inscription: Obama Nomics – Monkey see, monkey spend.
Telling Negroes that they evolved from monkeys and look like monkeys goes back as far as I can remember. It was part of the ongoing daily humiliation we had to endure. Not that this vile expression has ever gone away, it is an old rehash out of the same closet as great-great-great-grandpa’s Confederate uniform.
EDDIE GRIFFIN ADVICE TO THE NAACP-The pictures identified above are indeed proof of racism. The organization should neither be shamed nor intimidation in revealing an undeniable social reality. Pass the Resolution and move on to the next work, and never look behind. It is now incumbent upon the Tea Party Movement to keep these vile images out of its ranks and away from its rallies. The rest we can devote to an open and honest political debate, if we can keep honest alive.
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Some people are questioning the resolution of the NAACP about racism in the Tea Party- a resolution, mind you, that still has to be finalized. But when NAACP President Benjamin Jealous spoke about the resolution, there were clearly despicable pictures in the background as proof of what he meant.
NO, not everybody in the Tea Party is racist, and I doubt if many really understand what racism truly means outside of bigotry. This is why I stopped using the term “racism” to describe “white supremacy”- the ideology of “white rule”, either by natural divine right or intellectual superiority. Most bigots fall on the low end of the IQ pool, easily aroused, dumped, and hoodwinked, by their more intelligent counterparts.
In an article in the Fort Worth Weekly, I forewarned that “unhealthy rhetoric” coming from the ranks of the Tea Party was comparable to the racist rhetoric hurled at African-Americans during the Civil Rights Movement. (See “Unhealthy Rhetoric” by Eddie Griffin, Fort Worth Weekly, March 31, 2010). Instead of toning down the hostilities, some readers unleashed their anger upon me as the writer and demanded proof.
I presented a montage of pictures to the editor Gayle Reeves, which was later included in an editorial, “Tea Parties, Racism and Eddie Griffin”. As I asserted in the original article: “Plausible denial is a racist’s chief defense. That nobody saw him, nobody heard him, and nobody can prove what is in his heart is all the cover he needs.”
The YouTube link to Gayle’s editorial has been disconnected (for obvious or unobvious reasons), but the montage is picture proof is here, and here is why these depictions are racially offensive:
(1:34-1:43) A poster read: Save White America
What is “White America”? How is it different from “Other America”? Why the implied dichotomy between White and Black America? Why must I accept the unscientific codification of Race based on skin color? And, why does “White America” feel imperiled and the rest of us do not? There are no white people, per se, only people who are spoofed into believing genetic and pigmentation means something.
Politics is colorless, but not odorless.
(1:17-1:34) A poster read: Slave Owner Taxpayer - Niggar
By civil convention, I thought the N-word was antiquated due its vile nature and hateful conjuring. But here is a man, in patriotic red, white, and blue, with this sign.
(2:06-2:14) A poster read: Obama is the Antichrist – Oust Obama
(4:00-4:09) A poster read: The Antichrist is living in the White House
When people use religion to vilify the president in a demonic way, he or she intentionally corrupts the scriptures, as if there is no respect for the true and living God in heaven, or the leader elected by the majority of the people.
What does this say of those of us who voted for Obama? That we are satanic?
(2:39-2:47) A poster with an image of Barack Obama half-dressed in savage garb with a bone in his nose.
The image is reminiscent of pictures I remember as a child during 1940s and 1950s when we realized our African roots. We were brainwashed into shame about our heritage by these very same pictures. But there were Negro actors willing to portray such roles on stage and in movies.
We were taught that Africans were always uncivilized and dressed like this, not the fact that Africa was colonized, raped and pillaged, carved up like a pork chop, and the people thrown back into the stone ages by European encroachment. In time we discover Timbuktu and the cradle of civilization, and that Africa gave the Greeks their education, and Moors gave the world the Arabic number system.
It took a life time to overcome this shame, and now it returns in this form.
(2:47-2:55) A poster with a cartoon monkey with the inscription: Obama Nomics – Monkey see, monkey spend.
Telling Negroes that they evolved from monkeys and look like monkeys goes back as far as I can remember. It was part of the ongoing daily humiliation we had to endure. Not that this vile expression has ever gone away, it is an old rehash out of the same closet as great-great-great-grandpa’s Confederate uniform.
EDDIE GRIFFIN ADVICE TO THE NAACP-The pictures identified above are indeed proof of racism. The organization should neither be shamed nor intimidation in revealing an undeniable social reality. Pass the Resolution and move on to the next work, and never look behind. It is now incumbent upon the Tea Party Movement to keep these vile images out of its ranks and away from its rallies. The rest we can devote to an open and honest political debate, if we can keep honest alive.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Ineffective Prosecution in Oscar Grant Murder Case
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
To mar the day of Barack Obama’s historic inauguration as the first African-American President of the United States, Oscar Grant was shot in the back by BART police Officer Johannes Mehserle in Oakland, California.
Officers had been called in to quell a disturbance on the train, in which several youth were engaged in a fight, after a night of New Year’s revelry. Tensions escalated after the officers arrived and tried to take control of the situation. When Grant attempted to act as peacemaker, Officer Tony Pirone shouted racial slurs and ordered the young man arrested. Grant was wrest to the ground, face down, and restrained, when Officer Mehserle rose, drew his gun, and nonchalantly fired, pointblank, into the back of Grant. The young man died a couple of hours later at a local hospital, January 1, 2009.
The entire incident was video recorded by several bystanders, from several different angles. It is obvious to us that the unarmed Oscar Grant was murdered in cold blood. After public outrage, Johannes Mehserle resigned, fled to Nevada, and was later arrested, charged, and tried.
However, if the wheel of Justice grinds every so slowly, then in the case of Oscar Grant, it ground to a halt, because on Thursday, July 8, 2010, a Los Angeles jury found Mehserles guilty of involuntary manslaughter, and not guilty of second degree murder or voluntary manslaughter.
Sentencing is scheduled for August 6 and could range from probation to 5-14 years in prison. In the meantime, the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department is looking into the case.
WHAT HAPPENED?
Bringing Mehserles to justice took almost an act of congress, because there appeared no desire to pursue an internal investigation the incident, though 5 or 6 officers were present on the scene at the time. It was not until video of the shooting began to circulate to the outside world that the blue wall of silence and cover-up was breached. Another innocent black man was dead, one of several, in the post election of Barack Obama.
On January 8, 2010, after failing to get BART to investigate the incident, Eddie Griffin (BASG) sent the following letter to the Board of Directors.
BART Board of Directors
P.O. Box 12688
Oakland , CA 94604-2688
(510) 464-6095
BoardofDirectors@bart.gov
c/o Kenneth A. Duron
District Secretary
San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District
300 Lakeside Drive, 23rd Floor, Oakland, California 94612
510.464.6080, fax: 510.464.6011
“Kduron” Kduron@bart.gov
To Directors: Carole Ward Allen, Bob Franklin, Joel Keller, Gail Murray, John McPartland, Thomas Blalock, Lynette Sweet, James Fang, Tom Radulovich
[Excerpted] We contacted your office on yesterday about the unprovoked shooting of 22-year old Oscar Grant in Fruitvale, Lake Merritt & 12th Street Station in Oakland... There is prima facie evidence, by these videos, that shows Officer Johannes Mehserle shot a defenseless man in the back while he was constrained… There is a compelling probable cause that the officer murdered the victim. As you know this video was offered to the police department investigators. Instead of immediately arresting the officer, BART put him in hiding… We are not seeking lynch mob justice before due process run its course… If you can watch this video also and come away feeling that your department acted appropriately, do realize there is a strong possibility the unrest will continue, and more arrests is not the solution. The city has brought this curse upon itself… Sincerely, Eddie Griffin
Acknowledgement & Response from BART
From: Kduron@bart.gov
Subject: Re: Unprovoked Shooting of Oscar Grant
To: eddiegriffin_basg@yahoo.com
Date: Tuesday, January 6, 2009, 4:28 PM
Mr. Griffin,
Thank you for your email. Your message will be shared with the Board of Directors as requested.
The following is a link to the District's webpage with news releases/video regarding the officer involved shooting on January 1, 2009.
http://www.bart.gov/news/articles/2009.aspx
Thank you for taking the time to advise us of your concerns.
Kenneth A. Duron
District Secretary
San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District
300 Lakeside Drive, 23rd Floor, Oakland, California 94612
510.464.6080, fax: 510.464.6011, email: kduron@bart.gov
A Petition for Redress of Grievance
There were riots in the Bay area in the aftermath of Grant’s murder. There were riots following the Mehserle jury verdict, despite the many calls for peace and calm. As we said before, we were not looking for “lynch mob justice”, but due process and justice mete for the crime.
Our reliance upon the courts is very disappointing, because it is justice by contrast: White officer versus Black suspect. The benefit of doubt goes to the officer instead of the victim. Had African-Americans been included on the jury, the verdict might have been different. But it reverts back to the fact that the district attorney had no heart for the case to begin with.
A recent article in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram alludes to an old practice in Texas courtrooms called “stacking the jury”. The jury selection process (voir dire) is not always fair and honest, and verdicts are not always what justice requires.
Precedence
Although everybody in Mississippi and the rest of the world knew Roy Bryant and J.W. Milam tortured and murdered an innocent 14-year old named Emmitt Till in Money, Mississippi, on August 8, 1955, though the all-white jury was presented with firsthand eyewitness testimony, they still found the two Not Guilty.
If there were any benefit of doubt, then surely it was removed when the two gave an interview to Look Magazine in January 1956, providing the harrowing details of the torture and murder. By the law of Double Jeopardy, they could not be tried again at the time, which led to the Justice Department to include Murder as a violation of Civil Rights, especially when murder is carried out Under the Color of Law, by a law enforcement official.
[Oscar Grant was only one of several black men shot and killed immediately following the election of Barack Obama, reminiscent of the night that Jack Johnson won the heavyweight championship of the world.]
To mar the day of Barack Obama’s historic inauguration as the first African-American President of the United States, Oscar Grant was shot in the back by BART police Officer Johannes Mehserle in Oakland, California.
Officers had been called in to quell a disturbance on the train, in which several youth were engaged in a fight, after a night of New Year’s revelry. Tensions escalated after the officers arrived and tried to take control of the situation. When Grant attempted to act as peacemaker, Officer Tony Pirone shouted racial slurs and ordered the young man arrested. Grant was wrest to the ground, face down, and restrained, when Officer Mehserle rose, drew his gun, and nonchalantly fired, pointblank, into the back of Grant. The young man died a couple of hours later at a local hospital, January 1, 2009.
The entire incident was video recorded by several bystanders, from several different angles. It is obvious to us that the unarmed Oscar Grant was murdered in cold blood. After public outrage, Johannes Mehserle resigned, fled to Nevada, and was later arrested, charged, and tried.
However, if the wheel of Justice grinds every so slowly, then in the case of Oscar Grant, it ground to a halt, because on Thursday, July 8, 2010, a Los Angeles jury found Mehserles guilty of involuntary manslaughter, and not guilty of second degree murder or voluntary manslaughter.
Sentencing is scheduled for August 6 and could range from probation to 5-14 years in prison. In the meantime, the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department is looking into the case.
WHAT HAPPENED?
Bringing Mehserles to justice took almost an act of congress, because there appeared no desire to pursue an internal investigation the incident, though 5 or 6 officers were present on the scene at the time. It was not until video of the shooting began to circulate to the outside world that the blue wall of silence and cover-up was breached. Another innocent black man was dead, one of several, in the post election of Barack Obama.
On January 8, 2010, after failing to get BART to investigate the incident, Eddie Griffin (BASG) sent the following letter to the Board of Directors.
BART Board of Directors
P.O. Box 12688
Oakland , CA 94604-2688
(510) 464-6095
BoardofDirectors@bart.gov
c/o Kenneth A. Duron
District Secretary
San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District
300 Lakeside Drive, 23rd Floor, Oakland, California 94612
510.464.6080, fax: 510.464.6011
“Kduron” Kduron@bart.gov
To Directors: Carole Ward Allen, Bob Franklin, Joel Keller, Gail Murray, John McPartland, Thomas Blalock, Lynette Sweet, James Fang, Tom Radulovich
[Excerpted] We contacted your office on yesterday about the unprovoked shooting of 22-year old Oscar Grant in Fruitvale, Lake Merritt & 12th Street Station in Oakland... There is prima facie evidence, by these videos, that shows Officer Johannes Mehserle shot a defenseless man in the back while he was constrained… There is a compelling probable cause that the officer murdered the victim. As you know this video was offered to the police department investigators. Instead of immediately arresting the officer, BART put him in hiding… We are not seeking lynch mob justice before due process run its course… If you can watch this video also and come away feeling that your department acted appropriately, do realize there is a strong possibility the unrest will continue, and more arrests is not the solution. The city has brought this curse upon itself… Sincerely, Eddie Griffin
Acknowledgement & Response from BART
From: Kduron@bart.gov
Subject: Re: Unprovoked Shooting of Oscar Grant
To: eddiegriffin_basg@yahoo.com
Date: Tuesday, January 6, 2009, 4:28 PM
Mr. Griffin,
Thank you for your email. Your message will be shared with the Board of Directors as requested.
The following is a link to the District's webpage with news releases/video regarding the officer involved shooting on January 1, 2009.
http://www.bart.gov/news/articles/2009.aspx
Thank you for taking the time to advise us of your concerns.
Kenneth A. Duron
District Secretary
San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District
300 Lakeside Drive, 23rd Floor, Oakland, California 94612
510.464.6080, fax: 510.464.6011, email: kduron@bart.gov
A Petition for Redress of Grievance
There were riots in the Bay area in the aftermath of Grant’s murder. There were riots following the Mehserle jury verdict, despite the many calls for peace and calm. As we said before, we were not looking for “lynch mob justice”, but due process and justice mete for the crime.
Our reliance upon the courts is very disappointing, because it is justice by contrast: White officer versus Black suspect. The benefit of doubt goes to the officer instead of the victim. Had African-Americans been included on the jury, the verdict might have been different. But it reverts back to the fact that the district attorney had no heart for the case to begin with.
A recent article in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram alludes to an old practice in Texas courtrooms called “stacking the jury”. The jury selection process (voir dire) is not always fair and honest, and verdicts are not always what justice requires.
Precedence
Although everybody in Mississippi and the rest of the world knew Roy Bryant and J.W. Milam tortured and murdered an innocent 14-year old named Emmitt Till in Money, Mississippi, on August 8, 1955, though the all-white jury was presented with firsthand eyewitness testimony, they still found the two Not Guilty.
If there were any benefit of doubt, then surely it was removed when the two gave an interview to Look Magazine in January 1956, providing the harrowing details of the torture and murder. By the law of Double Jeopardy, they could not be tried again at the time, which led to the Justice Department to include Murder as a violation of Civil Rights, especially when murder is carried out Under the Color of Law, by a law enforcement official.
[Oscar Grant was only one of several black men shot and killed immediately following the election of Barack Obama, reminiscent of the night that Jack Johnson won the heavyweight championship of the world.]
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Uncle Tom Shock Legal World with Gun Right Ruling
By Eddie Griffin
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Never would I have thought that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas standing up for a black man's right to bear arms for self-defense purposes. To stand requires a spine.
What Thomas has created, however, is a legal defense of the Second Amendment so thoroughly original and starkly race-based that none of the white justices would even acknowledge it, as if it were some blank sheet crafted by an invisible man… Washington Post
In the Gun Rights case of McDonald v. Chicago, Justice Thomas sided with the court's conservative majority in a 5 to 4 vote to give petitioner, Otis McDonald, a 76-year-old black man from Chicago, the right to buy a handgun. McDonald said he needed a gun to protect himself from young black "gangbangers" who were terrorizing his suburban Chicago neighborhood.
The case was joined by the NRA, with thirty-three amicus curiae ("friend of the court") briefs, filed by U.S. senators Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R, TX) and John Tester (D, MT) and U.S. representatives Mark Souder (R, IN) and Mike Ross (D, AR) asking the Supreme Court to find in favor of the petitioners and rule that the Second Amendment does apply to the states. The brief was signed by 58 senators and 251 representatives, more members of Congress than any amicus curiae brief in history.
Thomas agreed with McDonald, concluding that owning a gun is a fundamental part of a package of hard-won rights guaranteed to black people under the 14th Amendment. And just because some hooligans in Chicago or D.C. misuse firearms is no reason to give it up.
By the FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT, Thomas opens can of worms. The Right to Citizenship did not include the Right that Blacks could Bear Arms. There had been too many Supreme Court cases in history where seizure of arms from Blacks was condoned and deemed legal. What did Clarence Thomas have to say about this?
Referring to the disarming of blacks during the post-Reconstruction era, Thomas wrote: "It was the 'duty' of white citizen 'patrols to search negro houses and other suspected places for firearms.' If they found any firearms, the patrols were to take the offending slave or free black 'to the nearest justice of the peace' whereupon he would be 'severely punished.'" Never again, Thomas says.
NEVER AGAIN?
Thomas goes on to say, “Militias such as the Ku Klux Klan, the Knights of the White Camellia, the White Brotherhood, the Pale Faces and the '76 Association spread terror among blacks. . . . The use of firearms for self-defense was often the only way black citizens could protect themselves from mob violence."
From Frederick Douglass, Thomas writes: “The black man has never had the right either to keep or bear arms, and that, until he does, the work of the Abolitionists was not finished.”
Courtland Milloy writes:
This was no muttering from an Uncle Tom, as many black people have accused him of being. His advocacy for black self-defense is straight from the heart of Malcolm X. He even cites the slave revolts led by Denmark Vesey and Nat Turner -- implying that white America has long wanted to take guns away from black people out of fear that they would seek revenge for centuries of racial oppression.
Of course, Thomas's references to historic threats posed by white militias might have been dismissed if not for a resurgence of such groups in the year after Barack Obama's election as the nation's first black president.
And if their behavior turns as violent as their racist rhetoric often threatens, then Thomas will almost certainly go down in history as the nation's foremost black radical legal scholar.
POST COMMENTARY by Eddie Griffin
From the Supreme Court bench, Clarence Thomas can see clearly the history of African-Americans and their gun rights in the courtroom. However, as an African-American jurist, he is as alienated from history as he is today’s reality.
He has created a spoof, that as a result of this ruling, blacks will go out and arm themselves against white militia. It is not the arm, but its usage, whether legal or illegal. The problem is proving intent, and most of the time a black man using a weapon, whether in defense or self-defense, he will be criminalized or terribly inconvenienced for exercising that right.
A recent case, in Forrest Hill, TX, a black man shoots a thug breaking into the house. He dies, and the man was indicted. After all the stresses of exercising his right to bear arms, he was found no guilty.
Why do we have to go through this, when other people can carry their weapons in the open, and use them when they please? Carrying an unconcealed weapon in Texas is legal. But for a black man, it would lead to an arrest. That’s not law. That’s life.
Gun Right is not a right worth risky all a man's other freedoms.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Never would I have thought that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas standing up for a black man's right to bear arms for self-defense purposes. To stand requires a spine.
What Thomas has created, however, is a legal defense of the Second Amendment so thoroughly original and starkly race-based that none of the white justices would even acknowledge it, as if it were some blank sheet crafted by an invisible man… Washington Post
In the Gun Rights case of McDonald v. Chicago, Justice Thomas sided with the court's conservative majority in a 5 to 4 vote to give petitioner, Otis McDonald, a 76-year-old black man from Chicago, the right to buy a handgun. McDonald said he needed a gun to protect himself from young black "gangbangers" who were terrorizing his suburban Chicago neighborhood.
The case was joined by the NRA, with thirty-three amicus curiae ("friend of the court") briefs, filed by U.S. senators Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R, TX) and John Tester (D, MT) and U.S. representatives Mark Souder (R, IN) and Mike Ross (D, AR) asking the Supreme Court to find in favor of the petitioners and rule that the Second Amendment does apply to the states. The brief was signed by 58 senators and 251 representatives, more members of Congress than any amicus curiae brief in history.
Thomas agreed with McDonald, concluding that owning a gun is a fundamental part of a package of hard-won rights guaranteed to black people under the 14th Amendment. And just because some hooligans in Chicago or D.C. misuse firearms is no reason to give it up.
By the FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT, Thomas opens can of worms. The Right to Citizenship did not include the Right that Blacks could Bear Arms. There had been too many Supreme Court cases in history where seizure of arms from Blacks was condoned and deemed legal. What did Clarence Thomas have to say about this?
Referring to the disarming of blacks during the post-Reconstruction era, Thomas wrote: "It was the 'duty' of white citizen 'patrols to search negro houses and other suspected places for firearms.' If they found any firearms, the patrols were to take the offending slave or free black 'to the nearest justice of the peace' whereupon he would be 'severely punished.'" Never again, Thomas says.
NEVER AGAIN?
Thomas goes on to say, “Militias such as the Ku Klux Klan, the Knights of the White Camellia, the White Brotherhood, the Pale Faces and the '76 Association spread terror among blacks. . . . The use of firearms for self-defense was often the only way black citizens could protect themselves from mob violence."
From Frederick Douglass, Thomas writes: “The black man has never had the right either to keep or bear arms, and that, until he does, the work of the Abolitionists was not finished.”
Courtland Milloy writes:
This was no muttering from an Uncle Tom, as many black people have accused him of being. His advocacy for black self-defense is straight from the heart of Malcolm X. He even cites the slave revolts led by Denmark Vesey and Nat Turner -- implying that white America has long wanted to take guns away from black people out of fear that they would seek revenge for centuries of racial oppression.
Of course, Thomas's references to historic threats posed by white militias might have been dismissed if not for a resurgence of such groups in the year after Barack Obama's election as the nation's first black president.
And if their behavior turns as violent as their racist rhetoric often threatens, then Thomas will almost certainly go down in history as the nation's foremost black radical legal scholar.
POST COMMENTARY by Eddie Griffin
From the Supreme Court bench, Clarence Thomas can see clearly the history of African-Americans and their gun rights in the courtroom. However, as an African-American jurist, he is as alienated from history as he is today’s reality.
He has created a spoof, that as a result of this ruling, blacks will go out and arm themselves against white militia. It is not the arm, but its usage, whether legal or illegal. The problem is proving intent, and most of the time a black man using a weapon, whether in defense or self-defense, he will be criminalized or terribly inconvenienced for exercising that right.
A recent case, in Forrest Hill, TX, a black man shoots a thug breaking into the house. He dies, and the man was indicted. After all the stresses of exercising his right to bear arms, he was found no guilty.
Why do we have to go through this, when other people can carry their weapons in the open, and use them when they please? Carrying an unconcealed weapon in Texas is legal. But for a black man, it would lead to an arrest. That’s not law. That’s life.
Gun Right is not a right worth risky all a man's other freedoms.
Friday, June 25, 2010
Day of Prayer: June 27th
Gulf State Governors Call for Prayer- not Repentance:
The waters are troubled and not yet healed
By Eddie Griffin
Friday, June 25, 2010
From the Plano Examiner: “UPDATE! More Governor’s Proclaim Call For Prayer This Sunday”
67 days into the Gulf oil spill crisis, four affected State Governors have now issued proclamations declaring this Sunday, June 27th as A Day Of Prayer.
Texas Governor Rick Perry stated-" It seems right and fitting that the people of Texas should join with their fellow Gulf Coast residents and others across the country and around the world to thank God, seek his wisdom for ourselves and our leaders, and ask him for his merciful intervention and healing in this time of crisis."
Alabama Governor Bob Riley said-"Throughout our history, Alabamians have humbly turned to God to ask for His blessings and to hold us steady during times of struggle. This is certainly one of those times."
Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour wrote-" Prayer allows us the opportunity to reflect and seek guidance, strength, comfort and inspiration from Almighty God and citizens of Mississippi are urged to pray....."
Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal declared-"June 27th as a Statewide Day of Prayer for perseverance."
COMMENTARY by Eddie G. Griffin (BASG)
As surely as I write, I knew the day would come when they, collectively, would call upon the God of Heaven to heal their waters. So, I ask: “Who shall pray, non-believers?” They are all non-believers, because they say one thing and mean another.
Only yesterday, it seems, Governor Rick Perry was calling the BP disaster an Act of God, now he request prayer: to wit, “thank God, seek his wisdom, ask for his merciful intervention, and healing.” Yet he rejects wisdom and denies mercy. Why didn’t he pardon Timothy Cole before his life expired in prison? Oh, but he is so sad that the State of Texas allowed an innocent, college student, and veteran die in prison like a dog. And, the blood of Jamie Scott is now upon the head of Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour.
Let me admonish the governors that the oil is here, and it is here to stay for a long while. It is not an inevitable. It is a fact. Leaders accept facts. Prayer, in this case, is an act of desperation, in lieu of the facts. They want a miracle for nothing, without even having to pay the price of their sins.
Merciful Intervention and Healing: What the Governor of Texas ask, is this not what we poured out our tears over? Is this not why we begged and pleaded with Governor Haley Barbour for mercy and compassion upon humanity, for the release Jamie and Gladys Scott from prison? For an $11 robbery in which no one was hurt, these two young mothers, with no prior criminal records and had no direct part in the crime, were sent to prison in the State of Mississippi, sentenced to double life… seventeen years ago. [See Newsweek story]
Now both women who went to prison at ages 19 and 22 years old are grandmothers, and Jamie is dying from kidney failure. Both have consistently maintained their innocence. And, there is no evidence or proof that either took direct part in the robbery, nor heretofore, either had prior criminal record. Why then is the Governor of Mississippi so hard-hearted in this case.
How can they have the audacity to pray for mercy, when they are so unwilling to show mercy? And anyway, June 27th is already reserved as a Day of Blogging for Justice by ROOTS of HUMANITY, and some of us will be blogging for Justice on behalf of the Scott Sisters.
References from the Previous Communications of Eddie Griffin
September 21, 2005
[In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina]
“Message in the Wind”
Almost everyone who witnessed the events of the Katrina flood and the three-week aftermath speak of these happenings in spiritual terms. They say God sent us a message. But we all did not receive the same message. According to a letter-to-the-editor in the Fort Worth Weekly, some people see poverty as proof of God’s wrath and the flood as his damnation upon the poor. It is quiet a different spiritual perception than those who see the survival of hundreds of thousands as a miracle, a proof of God’s grace and mercy upon the poor.
If the survivors of Katrina have been so blessed to cross over to Texas, the flood may have washed them, but they are not all clean. With the flood and the wave of refugees came the dregs of the criminal elements, along with corrupt behavior. Some would say that the wrath of God was upon these elements, but somehow a few escaped the destruction and doom.
But the winds and flood did not separate the good from the bad, the just from the unjust, the righteous from the wicked. This was not Noah’s flood, in the spiritual sense. It was more like the city of Sodom.
Monday, June 21, 2010
Long overdue Justice may be coming to Mississippi… in the form of oil upon the pristine Gulf casino beaches
And, when they cry to Heaven and utter many prayers, then I, also, would hope and pray for Mercy, first for the Scott Sisters, and then for the State of Mississippi- and not in the reverse.
I need no approval or authority or consent of men. This is personal.
The waters are troubled and not yet healed
By Eddie Griffin
Friday, June 25, 2010
From the Plano Examiner: “UPDATE! More Governor’s Proclaim Call For Prayer This Sunday”
67 days into the Gulf oil spill crisis, four affected State Governors have now issued proclamations declaring this Sunday, June 27th as A Day Of Prayer.
Texas Governor Rick Perry stated-" It seems right and fitting that the people of Texas should join with their fellow Gulf Coast residents and others across the country and around the world to thank God, seek his wisdom for ourselves and our leaders, and ask him for his merciful intervention and healing in this time of crisis."
Alabama Governor Bob Riley said-"Throughout our history, Alabamians have humbly turned to God to ask for His blessings and to hold us steady during times of struggle. This is certainly one of those times."
Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour wrote-" Prayer allows us the opportunity to reflect and seek guidance, strength, comfort and inspiration from Almighty God and citizens of Mississippi are urged to pray....."
Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal declared-"June 27th as a Statewide Day of Prayer for perseverance."
COMMENTARY by Eddie G. Griffin (BASG)
As surely as I write, I knew the day would come when they, collectively, would call upon the God of Heaven to heal their waters. So, I ask: “Who shall pray, non-believers?” They are all non-believers, because they say one thing and mean another.
Only yesterday, it seems, Governor Rick Perry was calling the BP disaster an Act of God, now he request prayer: to wit, “thank God, seek his wisdom, ask for his merciful intervention, and healing.” Yet he rejects wisdom and denies mercy. Why didn’t he pardon Timothy Cole before his life expired in prison? Oh, but he is so sad that the State of Texas allowed an innocent, college student, and veteran die in prison like a dog. And, the blood of Jamie Scott is now upon the head of Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour.
Let me admonish the governors that the oil is here, and it is here to stay for a long while. It is not an inevitable. It is a fact. Leaders accept facts. Prayer, in this case, is an act of desperation, in lieu of the facts. They want a miracle for nothing, without even having to pay the price of their sins.
Merciful Intervention and Healing: What the Governor of Texas ask, is this not what we poured out our tears over? Is this not why we begged and pleaded with Governor Haley Barbour for mercy and compassion upon humanity, for the release Jamie and Gladys Scott from prison? For an $11 robbery in which no one was hurt, these two young mothers, with no prior criminal records and had no direct part in the crime, were sent to prison in the State of Mississippi, sentenced to double life… seventeen years ago. [See Newsweek story]
Now both women who went to prison at ages 19 and 22 years old are grandmothers, and Jamie is dying from kidney failure. Both have consistently maintained their innocence. And, there is no evidence or proof that either took direct part in the robbery, nor heretofore, either had prior criminal record. Why then is the Governor of Mississippi so hard-hearted in this case.
How can they have the audacity to pray for mercy, when they are so unwilling to show mercy? And anyway, June 27th is already reserved as a Day of Blogging for Justice by ROOTS of HUMANITY, and some of us will be blogging for Justice on behalf of the Scott Sisters.
References from the Previous Communications of Eddie Griffin
September 21, 2005
[In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina]
“Message in the Wind”
Almost everyone who witnessed the events of the Katrina flood and the three-week aftermath speak of these happenings in spiritual terms. They say God sent us a message. But we all did not receive the same message. According to a letter-to-the-editor in the Fort Worth Weekly, some people see poverty as proof of God’s wrath and the flood as his damnation upon the poor. It is quiet a different spiritual perception than those who see the survival of hundreds of thousands as a miracle, a proof of God’s grace and mercy upon the poor.
If the survivors of Katrina have been so blessed to cross over to Texas, the flood may have washed them, but they are not all clean. With the flood and the wave of refugees came the dregs of the criminal elements, along with corrupt behavior. Some would say that the wrath of God was upon these elements, but somehow a few escaped the destruction and doom.
But the winds and flood did not separate the good from the bad, the just from the unjust, the righteous from the wicked. This was not Noah’s flood, in the spiritual sense. It was more like the city of Sodom.
Monday, June 21, 2010
Long overdue Justice may be coming to Mississippi… in the form of oil upon the pristine Gulf casino beaches
And, when they cry to Heaven and utter many prayers, then I, also, would hope and pray for Mercy, first for the Scott Sisters, and then for the State of Mississippi- and not in the reverse.
I need no approval or authority or consent of men. This is personal.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
