Filibusters: #SCOTUS Obstructionists of Justice

Filibusters
#SCOTUS Obstructionists of Justice

Filibuster: an action such as a prolonged speech that obstructs progress in a legislative assembly while not technically violating the required procedures. To act in an obstructive manner in a legislature, especially by speaking at inordinate length.

On Wednesday a couple colleagues {Akeem Rashad Allah/DJ Wise and Salim Adofo} and I had the privilege to be on a conference call directly from the White House with other key African American and Civil Rights Leaders around the country about the Supreme Court nomination process that was moderated by Stephanie Young and Valerie Jarrett. Stephanie Young is the Director of African American Outreach for The White House and Valerie Jarrett is the Senior Adviser to President Barack Obama and Assistant for Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs in his Administration. If you're unfamiliar with these women I encourage you to Google them.

Read President Obama's "A Responsibility I Take Seriously"

Following the death of Supreme Court Justice and ultra-conservative Antonin Scalia, this left a vacancy in the highest court of our country. According to our Constitution, in order to fill that vacancy the current President, in our case President Barack Obama, chooses a nominee who is then confirmed by the Senate and then appointed to that position. This is a process that requires several steps, which on average has taken 67 days since 1975, roughly two months, and every U.S. Supreme Court nominee in history has received a vote within four months. President Obama has over 300 days left to serve his second term as our commander and chief so there shouldn't be a problem nominating another Supreme Court Justice, unless of course the Senate doesn't cooperate. After our President makes his nomination it's then sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee who conducts hearings to question his nomination to determine if they'll make a suitable Supreme Court Justice. When these hearings conclude, the Judiciary Committee votes on whether the President's nomination should go to the full Senate with a good, bad or neutral report. Republicans in the Judiciary Committee, led by their chairman Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa, have already made it publicly known that they are not going to vote for whoever our President nominates. The last time a Supreme Court nominee was denied a hearing was in 1875. To give you some context, this was 141 years ago during the Reconstruction Era when the Civil Rights Act of 1875 was passed to guarantee African Americans access to equal housing, transportation and jury duty inclusion. By delaying this nomination process and dragging their feet, these Republicans and their special-interest group supporters, could very well get their way and there are no formal repercussions by doing this. The only repercussions they face are from their constituents. So instead of upholding the Constitution and doing the job they were elected to do, they have chosen to be filibusters. The bottom line is "they" want "their people" in that position and will do whatever they can to block, obstruct and go against the Constitution and what President Obama was elected to do in serving his final term as our commander and chief. These tactics aren't new and reflect the continuous uphill battle our President and First Lady have dealt with the entire two terms they've been in office. A battle with elected officials being uncooperative, unhelpful, unsupportive and outright disrespectful. 

Members of the Republican controlled Senate and Judiciary Committee have tried to argue that the 2016 President-Elect, not our current President, should nominate a Supreme Court Justice because it's an election year. Mind you, the Senate has confirmed 6 Justices in presidential election years since 1900 including the Republican President Ronald Reagan who appointed Justice Kennedy. If the Senate fails to act, the Supreme Court could have a vacancy for the better part of two Terms. This means that without a 9th Justice, the Supreme Court's 4-4 decisions can't legally establish uniform, nationwide rules. Many have been outraged at the sense of defiance, recklessness and disrespect on the part of the Senate Judiciary Committee and according to the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights & The Leadership Conference Education Fund, "a broad coalition of 82 civil rights, voting rights, public interest, environmental, labor, religious, and education groups sent a letter to Senate Judiciary Chairman Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) and the 10 other Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, condemning their recent announcement that they will refuse to hold a hearing on—or even meet with—any potential Supreme Court nominee." You can read and share this letter here. 

Because there are no formal repercussions the Senate Judiciary Committee will face, except from their constituents, what can we do? First I would encourage you to share this article via your social networks including the hash tags #SCOTUS and #DoYourJob.

1. Post/Share media interviews, memes, articles and statements via your social networks that talk about the importance of the President’s constitutional duty to ensure we have a full supreme court. 
2. Post/Share media interviews, memes, articles and statements via your social networks that talk about the role of the court, the role of the President and/or the role of Congress when a seat on the Court needs filling.  
3. Share media interviews, memes, articles and statements in the comment section of media interviews, memes, articles and statements via your social networks.
4. Here are a series of graphics you can Post/Share via your social networks. 
5. Be sure to include the hash tags #SCOTUS and #DoYourJob in all of your postings and commentary. 
6. Find out the position of your regional and local public officials on this Supreme Court nomination where you live. Require them to state this position publicly and hold them to it as a matter of their policy record -regardless if they're running for reelection this year or in the future. 

Keep in mind that this filibuster scenario that's playing out on the national stage is also happening on a regional and local level throughout America. The reason you may not see certain things getting done in your municipality, your neighborhood or in your workplace is because of the same kind of people striving to block, obstruct and go against progress. Letting our voice be heard about the Supreme Court nomination informs the Senate Judiciary Committee that we will individually/collectively use our position, finances and vote to ensure that people like them, who are not doing their job, will not be in these positions to obstruct justice. We are also informing their constituents that we will not support them, especially in business. How can you trust a business person to do the right thing for their patrons [citizens] when they're deliberately supporting public servants who are not willing to do the right thing for their tax paying citizenry? All of us as citizens are expected to do our job and the citizens we've elected as public servants need to do their jobs too. It's just that simple. 

Peace,

Saladin

Beyoncé: The Duchess of Viralshire

Beyoncé

The Duchess of Viralshire  

When Beyoncé broke the internet Super Bowl week with the release of her Formation video, Super Bowl Halftime Performance and Take My Hand, Precious Lord mini-documentary, two things primarily happened; people reacted and people responded. From Political Talking Heads, Barbershop Talk, 15 second Instagram Vloggers, Conspiracy Theorists, Conservatives and Entertainment Bloggers, everybody and they Momma had something to say, positively and negatively. On February 9th, one of my colleagues Salim Adofo, Vice-Chair of the NBUF [National Black United Front], shared this poignant thought via his Facebook Page which effectively summarizes the same perspective I share:

"You can have whatever critique of Beyoncé that you want to have. The fact is she has help to keep the conversation of Black Resistance alive and in the mainstream media for the time being. I see this as a teachable moment. I understand the power and influence a mega star like Beyoncé has and if an incorrect message is sent out, it could be very misleading. Beyoncé is going to do what she is going to do. I cannot control that. However what I can control are the elements of my own cipher. I just need to perform my duty as a civilized man and continue to teach freedom, justice and equality. This gives me another avenue to educate some one that I may have not been able to reach before." 

On a personal level, I like Beyoncé's business acumen, work ethic and of course her beauty and sex appeal. Above all, I enjoy seeing how she communicates the complex dimensions of a woman; it's a level of sophistication you oftentimes don't see. Many women, especially in mainstream entertainment, are one maybe two-dimensional. If they ooze sexuality, that's all you see and it may take them a lifetime to change that perception. If they're chronically single and about that turn-up lifestyle, they may never successfully transition into a wife or mother, even if they got married and had a child. Beyoncé is an archetype of a woman's multi-facets. She's able to successfully and seamlessly articulate a variety of a woman's dimensions, which are, yet definitely not limited to, a Mother, Diva, Daughter, Sister, Wife, Bonnie [partner of Clyde] Queen, Girlfriend, Round The Way Girl, Sexy/Erotic, Activist and etc. Beyoncé's most recent manifestation is the real Sasha Fierce; the archetypal Phoenix from the X-Men, Dr. Jean Grey's alter-ego and one of the most powerful mutants. If you understand the context in which Stan Lee created the X-Men, the correspondence of Professor X. to Martin Luther King Jr. and Magneto to Malcolm X., what I'm saying makes perfect sense. In my assessment, some of the women who don't like Beyoncé oftentimes dislike one of her dimensions. Sometimes it's the same dimension they have yet to manifest. In other words, some women who criticize Beyoncé about her sex appeal, don't have sex appeal. Not all women are like that, some are, and those who are express it on social media every day. Some women simply don't agree with Beyoncé publicly displaying her sex appeal and think she needs to be more modest, more like a Sade. I can understand that concern for her or any woman's safety and any thinking person should. America is historically misogynistic, chauvinistic, [white] patriarchal and much of its low-brow citizenry still openly objectify, oppress and brutalize females/women with impunity. I talked about some of these standards in my article Is Bill Cosby Innocent or Guilty? This concern for her or any woman's safety doesn't mean that I think women should wear scent neutral potato sacks to not set off the savages. It does mean that I think we need to work towards a paradigm shift in terms of better educating our young girls and boys about self respect and respect for each other. It also means that if we want to teach that respect we need to consistently demonstrate it in our everyday lives and help each other do the same. Some of us, men and women, are savages and aren't going to do anything about our level of respect. When this is the case, it's important for us to manage our children's expose to this and help insure this kind of mentality isn't poisoning the wishing well of our next generation. As our children become young adults, adults and then possibly parents, they will make their own decisions about what they agree and disagree with. For those of us who care, it is our job is to make sure that the legacy we're creating, and will ultimately leave behind, helps lead our future generations in the right direction.

In seeing events like Beyoncé's recent media storm, it all comes down to asking ourselves, "What are you going to do about it?" -regardless if we're Team Reaction or Team Responded. One of the things that I've always strongly advocated is to critique something with contributions. Everyone has an opinion yet everyone is not willing and able to offer anything above and beyond that opinion. That inactivity changes nothing, especially when that critique is negative, and that's a double whammy. Even if it's a positive critique, we can still do something above and beyond that opinion. For example, I like the Hip Hop artist Earl Sweatshirt who was a member of the group OFWGKTA. Not only are my critiques of his music generally positive, I literally support his brand; a took two youth to a concert, I exposed thousands of listeners to him by featuring his music on a Musicology Episode of my show Atlantis Build Talk Radio, and I purchased some of his music and merchandise. I may not like everything Earl Sweatshirt does but if I do, I support it, with more than an opinion. If I don't, and I publicly share that critique, I offer some contribution as an alternative. I likewise don't like everything Beyoncé does artistically yet there are some things I do. In 2013 I screened Bey's 'Life Is But A Dream' documentary for an International Woman's Day event I co-hosted and again in 2014 for 9-12 year old youth in my STYA Program. If you haven't seen the documentary I encourage you to check it out, it's very insightful and especially empowering for girls and women of color to see. 

Queen Cee, owner of Queen Dollylama

Seeing all of these critiques I contacted one of my sisters in Canada, Queen Cee, who among many other things she does as an artist/activist such as the Be-You-tiful Girls Club initiative, owns and operates a company called Queen Dollylama that creatively re-images dolls to give them a naturally unique, ethnic and artistic look. As there is a lacking of dolls that are Afrocentric, she also specializes in re-imaging dolls of color. My idea was to build upon the positive momentum of Beyoncé using part of her platform to project black consciousness and culture into the mainstream media and collaborate with Queen Cee to customize a collectors edition doll that reflects these ideals of black resistance, #blacklivesmatter, Black Panther homage and of course #Formation. When complete I'm going to do an online drawing and give it away to one of my supporters. I will be sharing the rules of how to enter the drawing via my Facebook Page and Twitter so if you're not connected with me via Facebook and Twitter you'll need to in order to stay informed. 

In doing this project I am demonstrating what it means to "critique something with contributions" and expose my subscribers to Queen Dollylama and the work Queen Cee has been doing for more than two decades to advocate positive cultural expressions of people, especially women, of color. Events like Beyoncé breaking the internet will continue to be landmark moments within the chronology of our people that shapes the humanity geography of this world, whether we like it or not. The bottom line is we must be mindful of our position of power to consistently control this narrative. Not with an opinion, with contributions that are purposeful and a part of our legacy. Stay tuned for the Queen Dollylama Giveaway!

Peace,
Saladin 

Five Percenter Table Talks Featuring: Author Paul L. Guthrie

Five Percenter Table Talks

Featuring: Author Paul L. Guthrie

I recently had an opportunity to build with Author Paul Lawrence Guthrie about his book Making of the Whiteman, his documentary series via the World Dhamma Foundation and various other sciences of life. We've agreed to make a portion of our dialogue available to the public. There are Five Percenter newborns, others within our Nation and members of other conscious groups who are not familiar with his contributions in regards to KOS [Knowledge of Self]. I wanted to highlight some of those contributions. Also, over the years the Five Percenters have often been labeled Muslims and Mr. Guthrie's work, particularly clarifying some of the source material of the Nation of Islam's teachings and 120 lessons, has been very helpful in addressing this label. Do the knowledge!

Saladin Allah: The first time I heard of you was back in the 90’s and it was through a book you published entitled "Making of the Whiteman: History, Tradition and the Teachings of Elijah Muhammad." That book was a staple for those of us coming into knowledge of self before the proliferation of the internet and social media. Even today, and almost twenty five years later, that book is still considered a literary classic. What prompted you to write that book and how do you see it almost twenty five years later?

Paul Guthrie: At that time, a lot of the literature on the topic was religious in nature and I wanted to write something non-religious. I wanted the book to be short enough to read in one day; with over-sized type, to reduce eye strain; and to use plain words, so as to be understandable to everyday people. I'm happy that the book has held up well, over time.

Saladin Allah: True indeed. In addition to the book itself one of the best parts to me were the numerous sources you cited in the back. I read the book in one day yet invested many days researching the sources. Some of the books I found in my local library hadn't been taken out in almost twenty years. With the development and expansion of the internet, we now have a Millennial Generation born as social media natives. For many, web surfing and social networking has begun to replace the traditional fact finding missions of exploring local libraries, bookstores, visiting people and etc. to gain knowledge. What does this technological paradigm shift mean for our present and future generations? How does this shift positively and/or negatively effect ones journey who is seeking knowledge?

Paul Guthrie: Those references were used with the hope that people might go on to further reading. The way you used the book was exactly what I had in mind.

Since the rise of the internet, literacy has been in decline. And even literacy itself, is changing. Reading words printed on paper (in books) is a different process than reading online. When I first began to read online I had to almost re-learn the kind of thought processes used while reading from books. It took me several months to re-learn how to mentally process online information. Computers throw the information at you at a different speed and with a different flavor. It's not the same; it comes at you from a different angle. I promote that people use paper printed books (while they’re still available), and maybe supplement their reading with online sources.

I’m not very familiar with most of the social media. However, I think it’s safe to say that following the shift towards social media, people are becoming less social. Maybe computers should be used in moderation.

Saladin Allah: Since the release of your book I see that you've been able to successfully use this 'medium' to present something called The World Dhamma Foundation. What is the World Dhamma Foundation and how did it come about?

Paul Guthrie: Dhamma means reality. Dhamma is the word used in Buddhist circles to describe things as they are, as well as to describe the science or method leading to the attainment of insight into those things. Dhamma is a scientific discipline rooted in personal experience. World Dhamma Foundation promotes the study and practice of Dhamma (Buddhism).

Saladin Allah: Several years ago in 2008 through the World Dhamma Foundation you began to share a series of videos related to your research on W.D. Fard, also known as Master Fard Muhammad; co-founder of the Nation of Islam. In those videos you elaborate in detail on his origins in India, not Arabia and his teachings correlation to Buddhism, not Islam. How did you begin to make these correlations and what in particular within the Supreme Wisdom book and specific degrees within 120 lessons made you come to this conclusion?

Paul Guthrie: My Supreme Wisdom lessons come literally from a garbage can, from the alley behind Muhammad's Temple #8. The Temple threw them away in the 1970's. I lived a few blocks away, near 25th and Imperial and I still have those lessons today. The Temple was located across the street from what had once been the local chapter of the Black Panther Party.

The 120 or Supreme Wisdom lessons is a coherent body of teachings. A pattern or paradigm. In my view, Buddhist principles and practices run throughout the lessons from start to finish. When I look at the terminology used throughout them; as well as the principles and practices, they are consistent throughout with Buddhism. I think it's significant that W. D. Fard mentions no Islamic principles or practices. If we call the lessons “Islam” we should know it’s very different from what the rest of the world calls Islam. And it’s okay to do so, however for me it seems more coherent to refer to those principles and practices as perfectly consistent with Dhamma.

Saladin Allah: It's interesting you mention that because a similar paradigm shift took place with the branch of the Nation of Islam under the leadership of Minister Louis Farrakhan fairly recently. Over the last decade his Department of Supreme Wisdom stopped issuing official copies of the Supreme Wisdom book and consequently the lessons. His controversial Scientology campaign directing his believers to get audited at its church and study Dianetics also came a short time after this.

In your videos about W.D. Fard you talked about how the lessons only mention about a few Islamic words in comparison to ten thousand other words, and not in a traditional Muslim context. Another point you elaborated on, in addition to Fard's handwriting being Urdu, not Arabic, is that in his 'Instructions to the Laborers' he specifically defined the teachings as "mixed." In my own research I also found correlations between some of the lessons and what Madame HP Blavatsky taught within the Theosophy Society such as her being educated by hidden masters in the East during the time of Fard's childhood, the 25,000 calendar and etc. Did you also come across these correlations? What other correlations did you find throughout these "mixed" teachings other than Buddhism?

Paul Guthrie: Yes, in the lessons you can see evidence of the trends of that time. And as you've noted, Blavatsky’s Theosophical Movement is one such trend. Blavatsky's Isis Unveiled was published in 1877, and the same is officially recognized as W. D. Fard's birth year. Blavatsky is said to have borrowed the title Isis Unveiled, from the title of Anacalypsis, by Godfrey Higgins. The full title is: "Anacalypsis: An Attempt to Draw Aside the Veil of the Saitic Isis or an Inquiry into the Origin of Languages, Nations and Religions." It's reported that W. D. Fard frequently used the text Anacalypsis during his talks. Both Anacalypsis and Isis Unveiled focus on Buddhist India.

Regarding groups ceasing to issue the Supreme Wisdom lessons: maybe they believe they’ve exhausted the value contained in those lessons. Sometimes religious organizations ban or otherwise de-emphasize their source material for political reasons. Ancient Rome’s conversion to Christianity is one such example. In the case of Christianity, many of the early texts were banned following the Roman conversion. Rome did that for political reasons. The Gnostic school (Knowledge) was replaced by the newly Romanized, Pistos school (Faith). In politics and in religion, authority tends to flow uphill. Outside of politics and religion, authority normally rests with the individual. I think the lessons speak of that dynamic and guard against it - where the Instructions say, "I do not want importance among the Laborers nor Officials."

I mention the 25,000 year processional calendar cycle and the trillion-plus calendar year system in Part One of the documentary series. I plan to talk about a lot of other correlations in Parts Three and Four.

Saladin Allah: Much of what you say conflicts with what people are traditionally taught about Fard and the lessons. What has been the general consensus from those who have been exposed to your research? How has your research been received by the different branches of the Nation of Islam? And I ask because many people are unaware that there are multiple "Nations" of Islam with various leaders such as the late John Muhammad [Elijah's brother], Silis Muhammad, Solomon Royall, The Son of Man [Marvin Muhammad], Ahmad A. Muhammad, Minister Louis Farrakhan and others.

Paul Guthrie: Most of the people from whom I've heard have been open to the ideas. I think they’re exceptional in that they probably don’t represent the general consensus.

There are a number of Nation of Islam organizations. I don’t know that any of those organizations have received the Get On Board The Wheel documentary series in a welcoming way. Outside of the people who are already studying with us, the most positive reception has been from the Five Percent. I value their responses. Especially the older Gods -- many of them already know what I’m talking about. Additionally, I’ve heard from many rank-and-file Nation of Islam members; some of them have been very supportive. I value their support too.

Saladin Allah: Your research is what sparked a public dialogue and inspired various people to research, write about, lecture and even publicly debate the correlation between Indian or Indus Valley teachings and the original source material of the Supreme Wisdom book and 120 lessons. As Five Percenters, we are scientists of life, not religious or dogmatic. This is one of the reasons many of us appreciate you; you've added on and continue to add on knowledge to our cipher. Because we are not Muslims and don't base our worldview on a belief system, in our quest for knowledge we strive to be right and exact and stand to be corrected if we're not. If I'm building with another Five Percenter or anybody that's sharing information that either conflicts with or adds onto what I previously learned, I'm open to researching and integrating it into my life if it's right and exact. That attitude and posture is a vital part of the growth and development process.

Although change can be challenging for any of us, I think it's very difficult for most religious people because their foundation is belief, not knowledge. In regards to those who have been the most oppositional to your research, what have you found to be the most problematic for them to accept? What have you learned from this opposition and how have you addressed it?

Paul Guthrie: I agree with you on that, in real dialogue everyone wins. Also, I have tried to keep up with your builds for a number of years now. Your builds are informative and very solid. You teach by example Saladin and many people (including myself) benefit from that example.

As far as certain people opposing or not accepting particular ideas - I'm open to that. So far, the main opposition has been emotional opposition. I don’t see much evidence-based opposition. I suspect that over time the emotional responders will piece together a more coherent opposition. Those kind of emotional reactions are “magnetic”, it's just a way to throw us off course. In Dhamma practices, the magnetic is called clinging and aversion – if you watch, when someone reacts to an issue emotionally, you can see they’re trying to push you or pull you in one direction or the other – to turn you away from the issue. I’m open to critique and to dialogue and learning. I certainly don’t advocate that people agree with a thing until after they’ve thoroughly looked into it for themselves.

Saladin Allah: I appreciate that my brother and I'm honored that I've been able to add-on. Your mention of "magnetic" reminds me of the 22nd lesson in the 1-40. As you know, it talks about Yacub discovering magnetic while playing with two pieces of steel as a child. Within that discovery Yacub learned that the piece with the magnetic attracted the piece without. As it correlates to people, it was the piece/people without magnetic who were pushed or pulled and easily led in one direction or the other that the devil was eventually made manifest through. It was also this manifestation that eventually threw the entire human family off course. I've definitely witnessed and experienced various forms of emotional opposition and knee-jerk reactions to knowledge, especially in the form of social media trolling nowadays. If it occurs I've always strived to not go there because it's nothing more than a proverbial island of Pelon where people are made other than themselves.

Right now you've made Get On Board The Wheel Part One and Get On Board The Wheel Part Two documentary series available to the public and are currently working on Part Three. What other projects can we look forward to from The World Dhamma Foundation and are you currently working on any future books?

Paul Guthrie: That’s true, I’ve followed your builds for a number of years. I’m not surprised to hear that. It reminds me of the classic, WWII bomber pilot saying, “If you’re receiving fire, it only means you’re over the target.” Keep dropping that knowledge brother.

I do plan to put a few things in book form. Any future books will be free of charge. It's easy today to make ebooks without any overhead charges. I'm currently able to convert literature into epub, mobi and pdf formats. Under the current circumstances, it's far easier for me to produce and easier to distribute in digital formats. If people prefer, they can print them onto paper. That's how I plan to handle any future literature (free of charge).

The Get On Board The Wheel series is preparatory to the Dhamma Talks series. I want to share a view of Dhamma specifically tailored on our culture, using our language and our dialect. Alongside the Dhamma Talks series will be other series.

Saladin Allah: That's excellent to hear and I'm sure many of us are looking forward to that. Over the last decade I've seen people use some of your research to self publish books, do paid lectures and public debates. I've even heard that your book "Making of the Whiteman: History, Tradition and the Teachings of Elijah Muhammad" has been reprinted and sold without your authorization.

As there is a fine line between sharing knowledge and monetizing what we do as researchers, authors, consultants and etc., why have you chosen to share The Get On Board The Wheel series, the Dhamma Talks series and future literature for free as opposed to selling it at a reasonable cost?

Paul Guthrie: The information is free. Books, dvd’s, information or services from me are free of charge.

Saladin Allah: If it's true that your book has been reprinted and sold without your authorization, how have you addressed this in regards to your intellectual property rights?

Paul Guthrie: The last “authorized” version was in 1996 (around that time). Nearly all the copies since then have been bootleg versions (with the exception of maybe 1 or 2). A few years ago a friend asked me if he could publish a few thousand copies (he owns KHA Books). That’s probably the only “authorized” printing in nearly the last 20 years. I’m not charging him for those. I still own the intellectual property rights to the book and I do know who the bootleggers have been. I have generally responded to the bootleggers on a case-by-case basis.

Saladin Allah: I definitely understand and I will that you continue to address that. At one point an article I wrote was being used without my authorization as the forward to a book of lessons being sold on Amazon. It took some research but I was finally able to track down the author through his publishing company and get Amazon to stop selling copies and him to re-edit the book. It was a nightmare, seeing that we as Five Percenters don't sell our lessons.

Well Brother, our interview has drawn to close and I want to thank you again for this opportunity to build. Where can my readers stay connected to your continual work with The World Dhamma Foundation and is there anything else that you would like to share before you go?

Paul Guthrie: Thank you Saladin and thank you to your readers. 

Paul@WorldDhammaFoundation.com

The Flint Water Crisis: #FlintLivesMatter

    

The Flint Water Crisis

#FlintLivesMatter

     On January 16th President Obama declared a federal state of emergency in Flint Michigan because of its polluted water. Residents there cannot bathe in or drink the water, all children under the age of six have been exposed to lead poisoning and the national guard has been called in to help facilitate the process of getting clean/donated water to the people.

     According to USA Today Network Journalist Jessica Durrando, "Flint's drinking water became contaminated with lead in April 2014 while the city was under the control of a state-appointed emergency manager. As a cost-cutting move, the city began temporarily drawing its drinking water from the Flint River and treating it at the city water treatment plant while it waited for a new water pipeline to Lake Huron to be completed. Previously, the city used Lake Huron water treated by the Detroit Water and Sewerage Department. The state Department of Environmental Quality has conceded it failed to require needed chemicals to be added to the corrosive Flint River water. As a result, lead leached from pipes and fixtures into the drinking water."

     Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder who has been singled out as dropping the ball of this has stated for the record, "I'm sorry and I will fix it," and "Government failed you at the federal, state and local level." Aside from apologies, what are the short and long term solutions to solving this problem that has effected so many lives, especially our children? Like with many stories we see circulating in the news, some people view a crisis like this as having nothing to do with them. I beg to differ and refer you to the words of Dr. Martin Luther King who said, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."

     In Niagara Falls, NY we had one of the worst environmental tragedies in American history happen in community called the Love Canal. From the early 1940's to the mid-1950's Hooker Chemical Company, with government sanction, began using a partially dug canal as a chemical waste dump which equated to almost 22,000 tons of toxic waste being buried there. After covering the site with dirt and selling the land to the Niagara Falls Board of Education for $1 with a disclaimer, construction of a school and homes eventually began on this site. By the 1970's this landfill was in proximity to approximately 800 single family homes, 240 low-income apartments and a public elementary school. It was also during the late 1970's that complaints of odors and substances seeping through the ground were taken seriously and it was discovered that toxic vapors and the contents from this chemical landfill began to were indeed seeping into the drinking water, soil and basements of the residents, for years. This exposure was linked to everything from asthma, seizures, cancer, miscarriages, birth defects and various other issues. As with present day Flint Michigan, President Jimmy Carter declared a federal state of emergency in 1978 and some of the families were evacuated. A second federal state of emergency  was declared by President Carter in 1981 to relocate the other families after being pressured by activists.

     Like Flint Michigan, all municipalities, including the one where you live, cut costs and/or corners when it comes to its citizens. Publically it's called "balancing the budget", privately it's oftentimes a very different conversation. In Flint Michigan, that cost/corner cutting, or should I say neglect, was in the area of waste water treatment/management. In your city it may be the school district. Somewhere else it may be infrastructure. Other places it's a combination of cut costs/corners, especially when a large segment of its population is poor, disenfranchised, unemployed or uneducated. In many cases these communities are primarily people of color.

     While some of your local and regional public officials are striving to do their best to serve you, many are not for various reasons. Sometimes they're self serving and aren't concerned about the citizens. Sometimes they lack a consensus among their peers to get something done. Sometimes they lack civic engagement or valuable input from their citizens. Most times there are  layers of cost/corner cutting among city employees, department heads, city administrators, contractors and etc. that public officials have to strive to deal with, if they're not a part of the problem. As the crisis in Flint unfolds, the blame game has also commenced. Although Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder must be held responsible for this water crisis, he did not act alone and public officials on the regional and local level must be held accountable too.

     This should be more than a wake-up call for us to become more civically engaged where we live. As citizens, we are not immune to neglect. If you or anyone you know wants to help the families in Flint with a monetary donation, you can do so at this website: The Community Foundation of Greater Flint [CFGF]. The city is striving to streamline financial efforts through the Community Foundation of Greater Flint; a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization and your gift is tax deductible to the extent allowed by law.

Peace,

Saladin

Is Bill Cosby Innocent or Guilty?

Is Bill Cosby

Innocent or Guilty?

Since the rape allegations against Bill Cosby have come out, people have also come out on both sides offering their perspectives on his innocence or guilt. Some have framed it as a white supremacist witch hunt to destroy the black father image. Others have viewed it as a man getting off easy, pun intended, because of his celebrity status. What many are not saying, or taking a look at, is the cultural context or backdrop these alleged incidents happened on or the mainstream medium they're being discussed in. What do I mean by that?

When you look at Bill Cosby's comedy career, on different occasions he's done comedy bits about slipping women a mickey; drugging women. He did it in live stand-ups, on his comedy album it's true! it's true! and on Larry King Live in 1991. This doesn't mean that he actually did these things but it does mean that this was something that his audience related to; it was an obvious part of popular culture, especially in Hollywood, going back to the 1960's where these incidents date back to. In terms of popular American culture, some of its background music historically reflects this notion about its drug culture. Here's a very popular song covered by various rock, country and etc. artists called Quaaludes Again you can listen to below. The artist even explains to you what Quaaludes are.

  



Quaaludes Again covered by Pork

Post WWII in the 1950's America saw an expanse of drug use that was articulated in a popular Hollywood film called The Man With The Golden Arm starring Frank Sinatra, who was speculated to be a cocaine business partner of Colombian drug lord Pablo Escobar. Even when you look at the backdrop of 1960's drug culture, including Jazz music, it's rare to find jazz artists who didn't have contact with drugs. Many died from this. In the 1970's you see it's continuation with popular heroin addict songs like Neil Young's The Needle And The Damage, Gil Scott Heron's Home Is Where The Hatred Is and novels like Faggots where the characters are constantly doing Quaaludes as a party drug used in New York gay community before the popularization of AIDS. Even in the 1980's you see it the popular film Scarface when Tony referred to his wife's drug addiction, the coming of crack and President Reagan's so-called War On Drugs campaign. This type of popular American culture continued on into the 90's and 2000's and cannot be trivialized or overlooked when considering the context of the Cosby allegations. Being a Hollywood staple for many years, Cosby and many others most certainly had contact with the drug culture. Hollywood wasn't in a vacuum nor a place in an alternate universe disconnected from popular American drug culture. Because of this, it's rare to find any comedians, actors, musicians and people working in the entertainment business who didn't have contact with drugs. With the new designer drugs of today, coupled with various drugs of yesterday, I think it's still rare to find comedians, actors, musicians and people working in the entertainment business, especially in Hollywood, who don't have contact with drugs. This has been a part and continues to be a part of popular American culture. A popular American culture that some of the present day corporate sponsored rap artists have now become one of its biggest advocates of.

Herein lies a fundamental problem; Popular drug culture is superimposed over a racist and sexist [misogyny and chauvinism] American backdrop. This is a problem that many of us overlook, ignore and ultimately fail to address. What this translates into are people of color and women being victimized in/by a system we may or may not choose to participate in. In the case of Bill Cosby we see this being played out on two fronts. First we see him being used as the face of popular American drug culture, which he is not. Yes it's possible that he sexually assaulted women in his past and got away with it because of his celebrity status and the fact that he is a male. It's possible that some of these women were active participants or outright lying. It's also a fact that various others were doing this, especially white male celebrities, yet they have not been demonized in the same way Cosby is. Take Roman Polanski for example, the famous director, producer, writer and actor who drugged and raped a thirteen year old at Jack Nicholson's house. He plead guilty to the charge of "Unlawful Sexual Intercourse with a minor" and in 1988 he agreed to pay her $500,000 plus interest based upon a civil suit. This and countless examples show you there's a contradiction here.

Secondly we see the marginalization of women living in a misogynistic society that mirrors ancient Rome and women in the Victorian era. Because of this, females/women are devalued, objectified and their issues trivialized. Take for example the recent public outrage surrounding the Rick Ross album Black Market that was pulled from Walmart's website because the song Free Enterprise had Anti-George Zimmerman/Donald Trump lyrics. In it Ross raps, "Assassinate Trump like I’m Zimmerman/Now accept these words as they came from Eminem." This is the same Rick Ross who was slapped on the wrist for his rape rap verse, "Put molly all in her champagne, she ain’t even know it/I took her home and I enjoyed that/She ain’t even know it" on the Rocko song U.O.E.N.O. While he was kicked off of the public campaign to represent the Reebok brand at the time, he is still the face of its Rebook CrossFit training program he remixed as #RossFit. What this and various scenarios sadly demonstrate is that females/women, especially ones of color, being violated, unacknowledged and not protected comes along with the territory in a historically sexist [misogynistic and chauvinistic] society. Now I've heard the argument that some or many of the women accusing Bill Cosby of sexual assault are hoes who were trying to f*ck their way to the top. Well even if this was the case, based upon your definition of a hoe or even a woman who proudly calls herself a hoe, even a so-called hoe has the right to be conscious and coherent while she's f*cking her way to the top. In other words, at no point is it alright to take advantage of any female/woman or male/man, without or even with, their consent, period. Unfortunately, this attitude towards human life has gone on since America's unsavory inception, up until today. In addition to looking at what's happening with these allegations, another problem is people don't want to look at the sick system that helps produce, protect and perpetuate these dysfunctional behaviors.

I don't anticipate or expect this narrative to be discussed along with the Cosby sexual assault allegations. Nor do I expect some cataclysmic shift in the American culture that continues to produce, protect and perpetuate dysfunction. This would require a system to indict itself. Has Bill Cosby received celebrity privileges surrounding these allegations? Absolutely, and this is a problem. Is he being treated differently than his white counterparts who've had sexual allegations or plead guilty to sex offenses? Absolutely, and this is a problem. Are victims or alleged victims of sexual abuse, especially females/women, blamed for what happened to them and/or slut shammed? Absolutely, and this is a problem. Has there been a popular American drug culture going on since the 1960's up until today that has shaped every aspect of this society, including the commentary surrounding these allegations? Absolutely, and this is a problem too. In analyzing what's going on I would encourage people to not get sucked into an emotional game on a lopsided field governed with unfair rules, covered by unfair commentators and funded by unfair sponsors.  In the end, nobody wins but them, unless we're wise enough to not play their game. Whether Bill Cosby gets convicted of something or not, the popular American culture is still here and we'll see more people like him in the news. Whether some of the women who've accused him of sexual assault are proven to be true, the popular American culture is still here and we'll see more people like them in the news. As we critique these allegations and determine what needs to be done based upon the findings of facts, we must also examine the areas in this cultural system that need to be revamped that makes drug and rape culture acceptable. This is especially important for our youth -who are being shaped and molded into the image and likeness of this kind of culture.

Peace,

Saladin



What You Need To Know About The RZA Bloomberg Interview

What You Need To Know

About The RZA Bloomberg Interview

In a recent interview on the with-all-due-respect segment of Bloomberg Politics, Wu-Tang Clan frontman Prince Rakeem Allah, AKA The RZA, spoke on #blacklivesmatter, police brutality, the black male image, Donald Trump and the 2016 Presidential Election that some have praised and criticized him about. If you have not seen parts of this interview you can view it here: RZA Bloomberg Politics Interview.

With the growth and development of the Social Media Age, everyone now has a public figure platform. A platform where whatever we say or do can be held for or against us in a court of law and in the court of public opinion. I've seen people get arrested or fired from their jobs because of a Facebook status. I've seen companies loose money because of a video. I've watched celebrities get shunned because of a snapshotted tweet they tried to delete. Aside from net worth, there's a very thin line that separates celebrities from everyday people. At any given moment, you as an everyday person can end up going viral because of something and be catapulted into the national or even international spotlight. When this has happened, most are completely unprepared and this serves one lopsided purpose: the media's ratings, web traffic and analytics data that drives economic trends. One of the main concerns I've had and have worked to address is the lacking or non-existence of effective PR representation for black/brown people, and any group that's considered a minority, when we're engaging the mainstream media -especially celebrities. Whether it's LeBron James being asked about the Tamir Rice case and his response that he hasn't been on top of it, Young Thug's response to being asked about police brutality and even Dej Loaf saying she had no clue who Boss was when I interviewed her in Toronto, this unpreparedness coupled with a lack of PR representation is not working in our best interest. The idea of news reporters looking around for the black person in the shower cap to interview is over. Now the media has learned effective tactics to shower cap people they choose to interview.

In all of the responses I've seen about RZA's Interview, whether pro or con, it amazed me how so many people had an opinion without ever questioning the actual context and forum this interview was conducted in. First and foremost, that interview was conducted by Bloomberg L.P.; a global business, financial information and news company. Bloomberg has over a quarter of a million professional service subscribers and approximately one million business week subscribers in over 150 countries. Demographically speaking, their target audience are not Millennials, nor do they look like RZA, his 6ft 4in son, or any of us voicing our opinion. Over 85% are middle age white men with money. This is to say that many of us weren't invited to that Bloomberg conversation. RZA was speaking to a middle aged white journalist with money to other middle aged white men with money, and a lot of what he had to say was agreeable with them.

Now, here's the fundamental problem with many of us, such as RZA, who speak to audiences like this that don't reflect the minority group we're a part of, regardless how American we claim to be: we don't consider the audience and who we're talking to. As a Guest Columnist for my local paper I wrote an article in December of 2014 entitled "Of course 'All Lives Matter" in response to the blacklash the Black Lives Matter movement began to receive. Ironically, it's the same "of course all lives matter" quote RZA used in his interview yet we both took very different approaches in articulating it. Because the primary subscribers to the local paper where I live are also middle age whites, I know the audience I'm communicating to and commit myself to sharing a unique perspective that's usually not represented and/or respected in their mainstream media. In reading my article above and knowing their primary audience, ask yourself what purpose does that article serve them. In listening to RZA's interview and knowing Bloomberg's primary audience, ask yourself what purpose did that interview possibly serve them. Is that demographic more conscious of the legitimate challenges black/brown people and other minority groups deal with in regards to police brutality? Does that demographic know anything more about the valid criticisms black/brown people and other minority groups have about Donald Trump's or Hillary Clinton's policies? Do you think Bloomberg's audience received commentary that would help them become more aware and sensitive to the perspectives of black/brown people and other minority groups? 

Some of us that simply agreed with RZA's commentary are equivalent to janitors cleaning up an office, overhearing parts of a conversation about us in an executive boardroom by a black man with white executives around him and butting into the conversation to voice our opinion. Let me reiterate that this interview was by Bloomberg L.P for its share holders and subscribers, not for us -even though we were being discussed. After this interview was edited and shared with their primary share holders and subscribers, then it was shared with us; the outsiders. Many of our unsolicited opinions are only used to reinforce and quantify that conversation by a black man with white executives around him in that boardroom. Some of us who voiced our opinion have not even researched Bloomberg L.P. or their founders. As Five Percenters who pride ourselves on "doing the knowledge" first, I find this especially alarming and unscientific. While all of us Five Percenters are entitled to an opinion, this is precisely why many of us are completely unqualified to speak for us as a collective. At least know the medium you're speaking through first, who their primary audience is and then what purpose your commentary will serve. Bloomberg L.P. was founded in 1981 by four men who were all colleagues at Salomon Brothers, one of the biggest trading and investment houses on Wall Street until they transitioned into Morgan Stanley -one of the companies that was given $10 billion during the government bail out that helped spark the Occupy [Wall Street] Movement and concept of the 1% controlling the world's wealth. Both Salomon Brothers and Morgan Stanley have been in the midst of financial scandals since their inception.

Michael Bloomberg: former Mayor of New York who was first elected as a Democratic in 2001 yet changed party affiliations for the next 15 years to Republican and its minor party Independent. With a net worth of $39.3 billion, Bloomberg defines himself as a Fiscal Conservative and he was publically endorsed by Rupert Murdoch if he decided to run for President. Murdoch is the Republican face behind Fox News and its affiliates.

Thomas Secunda: a Jewish mathematician with a background in computer programming and fixed income trading. With a net worth of $1.91 billion, Secunda is also a philanthropist who funds various Environment, Arts & Culture, Education, Health organizations such as the American Israel Education Foundation, American Jewish Joint Distribution and the UJA Federation: all affiliates with the Pro-Israeli anti-Palestinian AIPAC [American Israel Public Affairs Committee].

Duncan MacMillan: also a mathematician and investment banker, MacMillan and his wife Nancy are endowed faculty chairs at Rutgers University which means they provide permanent funding to the University for "genomic" research; a branch of biotechnology that applies the techniques of genetics and molecular biology to the genetic mapping and DNA sequencing of sets of genes. While his net worth is unknown, it's speculated that he's worth at least $300 million.

Charles Zeger: also Jewish, Zeger has a masters degree in computer science and has a net worth of $1.46 billion and made his money by developing the software for Bloomberg. Founder of the Zeger Family Foundation, Zeger and his wife Merryl are the only trustees who keep their grant funding broad and donate to many things. While their foundation accepts unsolicited ideas, they do not accept unsolicited grant proposals.  

Geopolitically and socioeconomically, that says a lot. The criticism RZA has received is primarily coming from black/brown people and other minority group's whose issues were under represented or not represented in his commentary, including Wu-Tang fans. However, Conservatives, Animal Rights Activists, Vegans, Patriots [Americans], Taoists and Law Enforcement were. That is a legitimate criticism I find problematic anytime a member of a minority group doesn't utilize their public platform to include the legitimate concerns of that group, especially in a mainstream medium where that perspective is usually not represented and/or respected. Another thing that was problematic is how non-indictments and police brutality against children like Tamir Rice, women like Sandra Bland and others that don't fit the black man profile wasn't addressed. They weren't men and their deaths had nothing to do with attire, dressing more refined and cleaning themselves up. Their deaths also had nothing to do with invoked fear. Saying to black males they need to take more responsibility for cleaning up their image, how law enforcement stereotypes them and it can contribute to police brutality is one thing. Saying to middle age white men with money that black males need to take more responsibility for cleaning up their image, how law enforcement stereotypes them and it can contribute to police brutality is something different. Either RZA knows what I'm speaking about and chose to speak in the best interest of the Bloomberg L.P share holders and subscribers or he doesn't know what I'm speaking about which means he's not as politically sophisticated as he needs to be before conducting interviews like this. As a man of knowledge, I'm sure that he's learning something from the public and private response to his interview. I also will that we are learning something too.

Peace,
Saladin