Yesterday, standing on the steps of the United States Capital Building, directly facing the Lincoln Memorial, where the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King delivered his "I have a Dream" speech, Barack Obama made history being the first African-American to recite the oath of President of the United States.
As an African-American, I looked at this historical event with a certain sense of pride that I think only an African-American could. With the painful history of the African-American engrained in mind since I was a little boy, watching Obama take center stage as the most powerful person in the world meant a little more to me.
I'm reminded of a Chris Rock stand up where he said "If you're white, the sky is the limit. If you're black, the limit is the sky." This may have been a very cynical observation by the comedian, but prior to this event, where was the proof that he was wrong. The image of African-American men was one of idiotic characters like Soulja Boy or Plies, they were all uneducated, made up the majority of the prison population because they were all criminals, and were all deadbeat dads. African-American children today, particularly young men, lacked a positive and realistic role model emulate and aspire to. Now that void has been filled with a man who lives his life through Christ, is a loving husband to a beautiful wife, a devoted father to two gorgeous daughters, grew up with no money, fame, or fortune yet with hard work and dedication worked his way through school to obtain an elite education, and dedicated his life to public service and helping others.
It is my sincere hope that black men will look at this and see they don't have to be rappers, athletes, drug dealers, or gangsters. Instead of aspiring to be the next T.I. or 50 Cent, Kobe Bryant or Lebron Jamses, there is now another option. If you work hard, play by the rules, live a good life, be a productive member of society, and serve causes bigger than yourself, the sky can be the limit for you too.
Thoughts?
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Monday, January 12, 2009
Israel-Palestine: Getting Past the Past
One of the first questions I am asked by friends or acquaintances of mine is how can I support Israel. I've also been accused of not being able to see both sides of this complicated history between the Jewish State of Israel and Palestine. However when it comes to history, its not that I don't see both sides- because I do. It's simply that after 60+ years (starting from the creation of Israel and going back as far as my critics desire to go) I think history is...well, history.
Show me more ....
Thoughts?
One of the first questions I am asked by friends or acquaintances of mine is how can I support Israel. I've also been accused of not being able to see both sides of this complicated history between the Jewish State of Israel and Palestine. However when it comes to history, its not that I don't see both sides- because I do. It's simply that after 60+ years (starting from the creation of Israel and going back as far as my critics desire to go) I think history is...well, history.
Following the fall of the Ottoman Empire, which controlled the land from 1517-1917, the Leauge of Nations (the prequel to the United Nations) delivered a mandate (known as the British Mandate for Palestine) to Great Britain to create in Palestine a national home for the Jews. Needless to say that Arabs were not happy. The attempts of the British (and the French) to divide the land that was Palestine led to many riots and fighting. By 1948, the British essentially gave up and turned the issue back to the United Nations which came up with its own plan on how to divide the land. Under this plan, two states where to be created, one for the Jews and one for the Arabs. The Arabs were soundly against the creation of a Jewish state and the loss of land and went to war with the Jews over it. The Arabs lost the war and the Palestinian State was never created. Instead, that land was loss to Israel and Jordan, leaving 780,000 Palestinians refugees.
If you are really interested in the detail of the history, check out the following links:
As for my support of Israel today, it comes down to this argument. The way that land belonging to Palestinian's and Arabs was essentially taken by a bunch of foreign countries, divided, and given away was unfair. In fact, the way a lot of land was acquired and countries were developed can be rightly described as unfair and unjust (the "discovery" of the United States by Christopher Columbus is a good example). However I look at it from a practical and realist standpoint. Does anyone really expect the map of Palestine to go back to the way it was 60 or 100 years ago? The reality is that today, in 2008, Israel is a sovereign nation. Starting wars by launching rockets and bombs into Israel's borders is not going change this reality. All it does is continuously aggrivate the situation and make life worse for the people you claim to represent. Additionally, if a sovereign country (Israel or any other country for that matter) was being attacked then I would say it is within their right to defend themselves also. That country should defend themselves using whatever means they have at their disposal, but they should also be responsible in doing such.
Show me more ....
Thoughts?
One of the first questions I am asked by friends or acquaintances of mine is how can I support Israel. I've also been accused of not being able to see both sides of this complicated history between the Jewish State of Israel and Palestine. However when it comes to history, its not that I don't see both sides- because I do. It's simply that after 60+ years (starting from the creation of Israel and going back as far as my critics desire to go) I think history is...well, history.
Following the fall of the Ottoman Empire, which controlled the land from 1517-1917, the Leauge of Nations (the prequel to the United Nations) delivered a mandate (known as the British Mandate for Palestine) to Great Britain to create in Palestine a national home for the Jews. Needless to say that Arabs were not happy. The attempts of the British (and the French) to divide the land that was Palestine led to many riots and fighting. By 1948, the British essentially gave up and turned the issue back to the United Nations which came up with its own plan on how to divide the land. Under this plan, two states where to be created, one for the Jews and one for the Arabs. The Arabs were soundly against the creation of a Jewish state and the loss of land and went to war with the Jews over it. The Arabs lost the war and the Palestinian State was never created. Instead, that land was loss to Israel and Jordan, leaving 780,000 Palestinians refugees.
If you are really interested in the detail of the history, check out the following links:
As for my support of Israel today, it comes down to this argument. The way that land belonging to Palestinian's and Arabs was essentially taken by a bunch of foreign countries, divided, and given away was unfair. In fact, the way a lot of land was acquired and countries were developed can be rightly described as unfair and unjust (the "discovery" of the United States by Christopher Columbus is a good example). However I look at it from a practical and realist standpoint. Does anyone really expect the map of Palestine to go back to the way it was 60 or 100 years ago? The reality is that today, in 2008, Israel is a sovereign nation. Starting wars by launching rockets and bombs into Israel's borders is not going change this reality. All it does is continuously aggrivate the situation and make life worse for the people you claim to represent. Additionally, if a sovereign country (Israel or any other country for that matter) was being attacked then I would say it is within their right to defend themselves also. That country should defend themselves using whatever means they have at their disposal, but they should also be responsible in doing such.
While I do support Israel in their efforts to defend themselves, I hate war as much as the next person. Like everyone, I hope to see all sides come to the table and work out the differences. But be realistic. Israel isn't going anywhere. Have realistic expectations, wants, and needs. The creation of a Palestinian state...realistic. The extinction of Israel...not so much. Lifting the blockade on Gaza...possible.
There is nothing wrong with remembering the history. You just have to know how to get past it.
Thoughts?
Israel should defend itself; But do it Responsibly
My support for Israel is no surprise at this point. As a sovereign nation, it is my opinion that Israel has a right and a responsibility to defend itself against threats of terrorism. However recent developments cause me to write expressing my concern for what appears to be, for a lack of better terms, irresponsible warfare on behalf of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF).
Show me more ....
My support for Israel is no surprise at this point. As a sovereign nation, it is my opinion that Israel has a right and a responsibility to defend itself against threats of terrorism. However recent developments cause me to write expressing my concern for what appears to be, for a lack of better terms, irresponsible warfare on behalf of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF).
First, on Tuesday, January 6, the IDF fired rockets at a UN School that was being used as a refugee shelter. About 40 civilians were killed in that incident according to the Minneapolis Star Tribune. The IDF first said it believed it was firing at Palestinian militants who were operating at the school. Today it says the rockets were aiming somewhere else, but missed its target and hit the school.
Show me more ....
My support for Israel is no surprise at this point. As a sovereign nation, it is my opinion that Israel has a right and a responsibility to defend itself against threats of terrorism. However recent developments cause me to write expressing my concern for what appears to be, for a lack of better terms, irresponsible warfare on behalf of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF).
First, on Tuesday, January 6, the IDF fired rockets at a UN School that was being used as a refugee shelter. About 40 civilians were killed in that incident according to the Minneapolis Star Tribune. The IDF first said it believed it was firing at Palestinian militants who were operating at the school. Today it says the rockets were aiming somewhere else, but missed its target and hit the school.
Also today, it was reported that the IDF may be using white phosphorus in the bombs and rockets its using in the war against Hamas. White phosphorus is a chemical that is legal in the rules for international warfare. It can cause serious burns to the skin, even causing it to peel off. It can also be used to ignite fire.
In regards to the first incident, I understand that mistakes happen. It's certainly unfortunate, particularly when you talk about the loss of life in children. However the IDF is using some of the most sophisticaed technology created and should be doing everything it can to avoid civilian casualties, especially when the international world is watching with a critical eye. Striking refugee camps is simply unacceptable and the IDF must double, triple, and quadruple check its coordinates and intelligence before engaging in a battle that could result in a substantial loss of civilian life.
The white phosphorus is another situation that is just not acceptable. Even though it is allowed in international warfare, it does not have to be used. The situation would be different if the IDF were dealing with an army that distinguished itself from the civilian population. However Hamas has a track record of hiding among the civilian population, meaning the risk is far too great to use such a dangerous chemical.
Finally, Israel has to do more to get aid to the people of Gaza. I applaud the daily 3 hour cease-fire and lifting of the blockade to allow for essential supplies to get to the people. However given the scope of the humanitarian crisis, I'm not sure that is enough. The government needs to better coordinate with international aid groups to safely get more aid to the people for more than 3 hours a day.
Israel should defend itself. But with the rest of the world watching and being critical of the IDF, it needs to be done tactfully and responsibly.
Thoughts?
Friday, January 9, 2009
Baltimore Mayor Sheila Dixon INDICTED on 12 counts
Many may know that I used to work in Baltimore Mayor (the Council President) Sheila Dixon's office while in high school and did some volunteer work for her first inauguration ceremony after she inherited the office from the newly elected Governor O'Malley. I plan to reserve all judgement and opinion until after all the facts come out and we know exactly what took place. But I encourage you, particularly my Baltimore family, to read the article attached.
Baltimore City Mayor Sheila Dixon was indicted today on twelve counts including perjury and theft.
Thoughts?
Baltimore City Mayor Sheila Dixon was indicted today on twelve counts including perjury and theft.
Thoughts?
Blagojevich Impeached
The Illinois House voted overwhelmingly Friday to impeach Gov. Rod Blagojevich, an unprecedented action that sets up a Senate trial on whether he should be thrown out for allegedly trying to sell President-elect Barack Obama's vacant Senate seat.
Show me more ....
The Illinois House voted overwhelmingly Friday to impeach Gov. Rod Blagojevich, an unprecedented action that sets up a Senate trial on whether he should be thrown out for allegedly trying to sell President-elect Barack Obama's vacant Senate seat.
Impeachment required just 60 votes. The final result was 114-1.
Blagojevich was arrested on December 9, 2008 under suspicion that he was planning to either sell or trade the US Senate seat left vacant by President-Elect Barack Obama.
Thoughts?
Show me more ....
The Illinois House voted overwhelmingly Friday to impeach Gov. Rod Blagojevich, an unprecedented action that sets up a Senate trial on whether he should be thrown out for allegedly trying to sell President-elect Barack Obama's vacant Senate seat.
Impeachment required just 60 votes. The final result was 114-1.
Blagojevich was arrested on December 9, 2008 under suspicion that he was planning to either sell or trade the US Senate seat left vacant by President-Elect Barack Obama.
Thoughts?
Thursday, January 8, 2009
100 Things American's may not know about the Bush Administration
After Jon Stewart mentioned it on the Daily Show I thought it would be interesting to post. Enjoy!
Thoughts?
No Due Process in Illinois
Today, an Illinois House panel looking into whether or not Governor Rod Blagojevich should be impeached, voted unanimously to send the case to the full House. The Illinois legislature has been looking into ousting the embattled Governor after he was arrested on December 9, 2008 for, among other charges, attempting to sell the US Senate seat left vacant by President-Elect Barack Obama. If the full House accepts the panel's impeachment recommendation, Blagojevich would then have a trial before the Illinois State Senate who will decide his ultimate fate.
Is anyone surprised? I certainly am not. The day Blagojevich was arrested practically every member of the Illinois State government called for his resignation. They publicly blasted the governor as a corrupt politician who doesn't represent Illinois values. These same legislators are expected to fairly and impartially decide whether or not the Governor committed actions worthy of impeachment.
Show me more ....
Today, an Illinois House panel looking into whether or not Governor Rod Blagojevich should be impeached, voted unanimously to send the case to the full House. The Illinois legislature has been looking into ousting the embattled Governor after he was arrested on December 9, 2008 for, among other charges, attempting to sell the US Senate seat left vacant by President-Elect Barack Obama. If the full House accepts the panel's impeachment recommendation, Blagojevich would then have a trial before the Illinois State Senate who will decide his ultimate fate.
Is anyone surprised? I certainly am not. The day Blagojevich was arrested practically every member of the Illinois State government called for his resignation. They publicly blasted the governor as a corrupt politician who doesn't represent Illinois values. These same legislators are expected to fairly and impartially decide whether or not the Governor committed actions worthy of impeachment.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of Rod Blagojevich. But this is about more than him. This is about America and civil liberties. When one American has their civil liberties threatened, it threatens all of our civil liberties. Without access to a fair and impartial legislature, how are we protecting Blagojevich's civil liberties- his right to a fair trial. The members of the house panel walked into the chambers of the Illinois State Capitol with their minds already decided. Blagojevich's impeachment process has become nothing more than a formality seeing as though the lawmakers in Illinois have clearly made their minds up. Under this system, if Blagojevich is removed from office, he'll be taking due process with him.
Thoughts?
Is anyone surprised? I certainly am not. The day Blagojevich was arrested practically every member of the Illinois State government called for his resignation. They publicly blasted the governor as a corrupt politician who doesn't represent Illinois values. These same legislators are expected to fairly and impartially decide whether or not the Governor committed actions worthy of impeachment.
Show me more ....
Today, an Illinois House panel looking into whether or not Governor Rod Blagojevich should be impeached, voted unanimously to send the case to the full House. The Illinois legislature has been looking into ousting the embattled Governor after he was arrested on December 9, 2008 for, among other charges, attempting to sell the US Senate seat left vacant by President-Elect Barack Obama. If the full House accepts the panel's impeachment recommendation, Blagojevich would then have a trial before the Illinois State Senate who will decide his ultimate fate.
Is anyone surprised? I certainly am not. The day Blagojevich was arrested practically every member of the Illinois State government called for his resignation. They publicly blasted the governor as a corrupt politician who doesn't represent Illinois values. These same legislators are expected to fairly and impartially decide whether or not the Governor committed actions worthy of impeachment.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of Rod Blagojevich. But this is about more than him. This is about America and civil liberties. When one American has their civil liberties threatened, it threatens all of our civil liberties. Without access to a fair and impartial legislature, how are we protecting Blagojevich's civil liberties- his right to a fair trial. The members of the house panel walked into the chambers of the Illinois State Capitol with their minds already decided. Blagojevich's impeachment process has become nothing more than a formality seeing as though the lawmakers in Illinois have clearly made their minds up. Under this system, if Blagojevich is removed from office, he'll be taking due process with him.
Thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
