Ride of the Valkyries | The Police

In Norse mythology, a valkyrie is one of a host of female figures who choose those who may die in battle and those who may live.

An investigation by the Associated Press revealed that “a disproportionate share” of $4.2 billion in Pentagon property handed out by the Defense Department military surplus program since 1990 was “obtained by police and sheriff’s departments in rural areas with few officers and little crime.” This all happened under the Obama Administration.

In 2016 some cities in Indiana were reported to have some of the lowest crime rates in America. Yet, they have MRAP’s. My question is why?

The police, at this point in time, appear to be in a war with America.

“It’s armored. It’s heavy. It’s intimidating. And it’s free,” Albany County Sheriff Craig Apple — the head of one of five New York county sheriff’s departments to receive last year’s shipments — told the Daily News at the time.

Then in January 2014, the Wall Street Journal reported that the Pentagon has roughly 13,000 mine-resistant, ambush-protected trucks to part with “because they have outlived their original purpose.”

“We’ve notified our friends and allies that we have MRAPs available and if they want them they can have them,” Alan Estevez, deputy undersecretary of defense for acquisitions, technology and logistics, told the Journal.

He now works for Deloitte Consulting LLP’s federal practice as a national security strategy and logistics executive.

Folks don’t hate police. We, and simply a bunch of others want police to break that “thin blue line”. That’s it. Admit that at least one person you work with, “just sucks at his job.” You are not a military occupying force. Police are citizens. Just like everyone else. Not military. Citizens, just like you and me. They’ve taken an oath to be good citizens, that we trust to do a job. No more. No less. Like me, Darrin Marion. And you. Darrin’s friends.

Sir Robert Peel, the father of modern policing said “The police are citizens and the citizens are police”.

“The problem is that the atmosphere does not yet exist in which an honest police officer can act without fear of ridicule or reprisal from fellow officers. We create an atmosphere in which the honest officer fears the dishonest officer, and not the other way around.” – Frank Serpico

 

Intraracism is gonna be here for a while. Dang.

What is intraracism?

In the early and mid twentieth century, intraracism was based on skin hues, where light-skinned persons were treated better and thought to be more privileged than dark-complexioned black people. I like to remind people about the “brown bag test“. A brown paper bag was the measure that often was the measure that would either allow or deny access. Something that was a holdover from the days of slavery. That bias is called intra meaning same as opposed to inter which denotes as different.

Intraracism at traditionally HBCU’s (Historically Black Colleges and Universities) was due to external pressures of government in the South. More than likely, those same government entities were run by the same Democrats that consistenty opposed legislation against lynching.

According to Professor Joy Williamson-Lott,  “Part of it was because they were under duress. The other more generous reading is that these were usually men running a black institution in a white supremacist society. And so keeping the doors of their institution open and allowing black people to crack the middle class was a way to fortify the black community. Some saw their role as making very strategic concessions. Others just made concession concessions.”

grambling fought intraracismI’m more than proud to say that my alma-mater, Grambling State University was at the forefront of breaking down the strongholds of colorism in the South. I

In today’s era however, things are a bit different. Intraracism is no longer driven by color-ism of any significant sorts. The intraracism of today, is primarily based on social status. At least that’s in my humble opinon. Yes, my opinon.

I’d like to see a study that addresses forms of discrimination of minorities use on each other. One on Intraracism.

A recent study by the Kaiser Family Foundation that addressed discrimination in America appeared to me to be a bit biased.

More than half of Black Americans and a third of Hispanic Americans say they’ve been treated unfairly because of their race or ethnicity in the past month alone, and some report being victims of racial discrimination that denied them opportunities in housing or in the workplace. At a time when more than half of Black Americans report some personal connection with the prison system, the vast majority say the criminal justice system as a whole favors Whites over Blacks. Meanwhile, White Americans are less likely than Black Americans to see racism as a big problem in this country, and more likely to say that individual behavior and bias is a bigger problem than institutional discrimination.willie lynch letter intraracism at its finest

The term black on black, white on white, or brown on brown is usually followed by the word crime. I wonder. Are they considering things such as intraracial discrimination a crime? Just a thought.

You Down with TPP (Trans Pacific Partnership)

This is an article that I wrote in the Blacksphere in 2013 about the now infamous Trans Pacific Partnership… Enjoy.

“We will not negotiate bilateral trade agreements that stop the government from protecting the environment, food safety, or the health of its citizens; give greater rights to foreign investors than to U.S. investors; require the privatization of our vital public services; or prevent developing country governments from adopting humanitarian licensing policies to improve access to life-saving medications,” – Barack Obama 2008 campaign speech.

Huh?  Gotcha with that one didn’t I?

The Trans Pacific Partnership is everything that we love from the Obama Administration: 1) it kills jobs; 2) it’s conducted in secret; and 3) it hands over US sovereignty to the highest bidder.  This is a trade deal which includes Australia, Brunei, Chile, Canada (the Canucks had to make concessions that are secret), Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States, and Vietnam (with China in the works).

The Trans Pacific Partnership is a trade agreement that has been negotiated in secret for the past three years.

I hate to sound like to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but every single the conspiracy theory I’ve read about Mr. Obama claims that he has done everything to prove he is the world’s leader. They say he will be a friend to as many banks that will take a US Treasury Check.  He will take care of whichever multinational that will write a check.

And Obama is actively on a quest to find (he’ll create one if he has to) a legal system that nullifies any Constitutional protections that US citizens dreamed may still exist.  If that’s the litmus test to conspiracy theory, and if I could put a name on the aforementioned theory, I would call it, The Trans Pacific Partnership.

The TPP forms an entity called The Investor State.

Through the TPP, a foreign corporation operating inside the US has the ability to circumvent our laws and gives international tribunals the power to enforce rulings and issue penalties for failure to comply.  I have just a “tad” bit more faith in our legal system than a tribunal.  Those penalties would become obligations of the federal government.

Oh yeah did I mention the pool of judges will come from rotating corporate attorneys from the various member nations.  Anyone see a potential “moral hazard”?

Those same foreign corporations (that have the ABSOLUTE best and brightest corporate legal minds that money can buy) have the freedom to sue member governments if they feel the laws OR policies of a member country appear restrictive or unfair.  Though the agreement has not officially been signed (it may be, who knows the entire agreement has been negotiated thus far by the transparent Obama Administration) negotiations have been going on for at least 2 years.

Let’s look at an example of how the Investor State (multinational corporations) would seek relief from a member country:  Ethyl Corporation v. Canada.

Ethyl Corporation wanted to manufacture an additive MMT in Canada.  Canada, a sovereign nation, chose to ban this additive which contained manganese, an ingredient known to produce serious neurological issues which sometimes resulted in death. Unfortunately, Canada was forced to remove their ban on MMT AND pay a settlement of $19 million dollars, AND issue a statement that MMT is neither a health nor a risk to the environment.

I cringe at the thought of a Chinese company suing our government arguing our child labor laws were unfair and placed the company at a disadvantage.  The potential wind-fall for global corporatism makes too big to fail look like a baloney sandwich.  Can you tell I’m upset?

The TPP removes any potential access generic pharmaceutical companies would have to manufacture cost effective alternative options.  That’s anti–free market.

There are SOOOOOO many things that are wrong with the TPP.  I can feel my blood pressure rise with my every breath.

Will all of this being said, if there is ONE THING that you should take from this, it’s that the Trans Pacific Partnership will hand over the sovereignty of our country to multinational companies with a fast track to handing over our public policy decisions that are made through a somewhat democratic process.

At least until Mr. Obama signs this trade agreement in the cover of night.   (Can you say NDAA?)