MINNEAPOLIS SHOOTING NOT ABOUT RACE OR FAITH (MUSLIMS & SOMALIANS)

MINNEAPOLIS SHOOTING NOT ABOUT RACE OR FAITH (MUSLIMS & SOMALIANS):

MEDIA ATTEMPTS TO FOCUS ON OFFICER BEING SOMALIAN OR MUSLIM.

DID THIS WOMAN PROVOKE THE POLICE?

ARE COP BODY CAMS ONLY NECESSARY FOR WHITE CITIZEN SHOOTINGS?

WHAT REALLY HAPPENED??


Sources: CBS News, NBC News, Heavy.com, YouTube


***** Lack of Police Bodycam Video in Minneapolis Shooting Astounds Experts


After an Australian woman was shot dead by police in Minneapolis, experts are questioning why the officers' body cameras were not turned on during the encounter.

Justine Ruszczyk, who used the last name Damond, reportedly called 911 after hearing a noise near her home on Saturday, according to her stepson-to-be. She was fatally shot by one of the responding officers.

Although Minneapolis police have not named the officers involved, NBC affiliate KARE quoted sources as identifying the officer who shot Damond as Mohammed Noor. Police sources also told KARE that Noor, who was in the squad car's passenger seat, aimed across his partner and out the window to fire at Damond.

But because the body cameras were not activated, the series of events is remained murky.

The Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) of the state Public Safety Department said in a statement that any violation of the camera policy would be investigated by the department's internal affairs bureau.

Last August, the Minneapolis Police Department's "Body Worn Camera" policy was rolled out just a month after former St. Anthony police Officer Jeronimo Yanez fatally shot Philando Castile — the aftermath of which was broadcast on Facebook live. It was unclear whether the implementation of cameras had any correlation to Castile's death.

But according to experts, there's no reason the officers' body cameras should not have been switched on when they approached Damond's home.

"The policy requires [Minneapolis police officers] to turn the camera on prior to use of force, and it goes on to say if it's not turned on prior to force, it should be activated as soon as it is safe to do so," said Teresa Nelson, interim executive director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota.

"So we have two officers who, after using deadly force — taking someone's life — didn't activate their cameras," Nelson told NBC News. "That's astounding to me."

The department's policy states that a body camera should be turned on for situations as minimal as traffic stops and for incidents as serious as use of force as long as it is safe to do so. The policy also states that if cameras are not turned on before an incident use of force, they should be turned on afterward.

"I think a point that gets lost is that these body cameras also have the benefit of protecting officers who rightly use force, because it has this ability to record a situation and visually show that force is justified," Ronald Sullivan Jr., a professor at Harvard Law School and director of the Harvard Criminal Justice Institute, told NBC News.

Minneapolis police and the state Public Safety Department did not immediately respond to inquiries as to whether the officers' cameras were turned on after Damond was shot. Noor's attorney also did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Officers who fail to abide by the department's internal policy are subject to discipline, "up to and including termination," the document says. If officers fail to activate their cameras, they are supposed to report that failure and explain why the cameras were not activated.

But Sullivan and Nelson said they have concerns about the internal reprimand policy.

"For officers who are clearly in violation of department protocol for turning on the camera — from my experience — it appears they are rarely disciplined," Sullivan said.

Specific penalties are not listed, and because a violation is handled internally, the ACLU is pushing the Minnesota Legislature and Minneapolis police to detail exactly what kind of punishment would be levied.

"The whole reason for body cameras is for accountability and transparency. If you're not treating it as critical, you undermine the credibility and benefit to body cameras," Nelson said.

Nelson takes issue with how the policy details when activation is required.

"There's sort of a catch-all that says 'when it's safe to do so.' So officers have tremendous discretion," she said.

Nelson said a variety of factors should have caused the officers to turn on their cameras as they approached Damond's home.

"My sense is they were at least had some contact with an individual prior to killing her," Nelson said. "I believe there would have been a point where something in the policy triggered them turning them on."

Then there is the dash camera in the officers' squad car.

"The Minneapolis Police Department has not said there is no [dashcam] video, just that the video didn't capture the incident," she said. "My question is: Is there audio, and why haven't you released?"

(A recording that purported to be audio of the Minneapolis incident surfaced on the internet Monday evening but NBC News has been unable to verify its authenticity.)

In a statement posted to the police department's Twitter page, Chief Janeé Harteau said she "acknowledged the pain and frustration that family and community members" felt after the shooting.

As the investigation proceeds, Sullivan said the best thing people could do would be to ask that police implement strict penalties for those who do not follow the policy.

Otherwise, he said, "officers will rightly think they can turn on cameras [only] when convenient and do so with impunity."

BLACK MEN IN AMERICA CAN'T WIN IF THEY HATE BLACK WOMEN (CIVIL WAR)

BLACK MEN IN AMERICA CAN'T WIN IF THEY HATE BLACK WOMEN (CIVIL WAR)

Sources:  CentricTV, Essence, The Root, Youtube

Video Highlights:

Debating the destructive, self-imposed civil war within the Black American community between Black men and women.

United We Stand; Divided We Fall!

**** WHAT IS BLACK MEN'S BEEF WITH BLACK WOMEN?

The myth of the 'angry Black woman' is driving a wedge between the sexes

Black men have seemingly declared war on Black women, and it's getting real. 

It's no secret that the battle of the sexes is something that's existed since Adam blamed Eve for biting that godforsaken forbidden fruit. For centuries,  men and women have been at odds over their biological and psychological differences, both legitimate and naught.

For men and women of color, however, the stakes seem to be at an all-time high. Whether it's baby mama vs. baby daddy drama or the delicate topic of dating outside one's race, Black men and Black women just can't seem to see to eye to eye.

Just look at the way critics (mostly men) came to the defense of rapper Future and assailed a social media attack against Ciara for bringing their young son around her new boyfriend, NFL star Russell Wilson.

 Ciara was publically shamed for something that (1) is no one's business and (2) an absolute double standard, as the singer pointed out during an interview on CBS "This Morning."

"It's been very interesting to hear what a lot of guys have had to say," Ciara said. "I feel like in a sense it's a bit of a double standard, because at one point in time when we were together, I took care of his kids as well."

"I was involved very early in the stage of us getting to know each other, and that's been a big conversation. It's kind of like, 'Well, what's the difference here?'" she added. "I think that even for the men that were outspoken, it's like, wouldn't you want someone to love on your child, or love on the child that you are speaking about?"

But of course Black male critics of Ciara don't see the double standard. When do they ever recognize the unfair standards and expectations they place on Black women? 

While women of color continue to be the backbones for their male counterparts and their families, they continue to bad mouth Black women as if it was not a Black woman who pushed them out of their vagina. 

In their eyes, Black women are “angry,” “crazy” and just about any other not-so-flattering adjective you can think of.

Writer Niki McGloster touched on this very topic in a Facebook post bemoaning a text conversation she had with a Black man stemming from a comment she made about a nude picture of Kim Kardashian. 

After saying Kardashian was fishing for attention the unidentified male accused her, and Black women, of being angry "mean girls." 

That debate turned into an exchange about how Black women hate white women for being white and liking "Black" things, whether it's a Black man, Black music or Black hairstyles.

"What i can't pinpoint is when some (i'd never say all) black men started hating black women? i'd like a date or a reference point," McGloster wrote on Facebook. "it's clear that black men are jaded about who we are, what we stand for and why we speak up about certain things."

Quite honestly if Black women are at the very least irritated they have every reason to be. Look at the way they are misunderstood, misrepresented and ridiculed. 

What's most heartbreaking is that a lot of that pushback comes from Black men themselves. 

And for any man of color that wants to perpetuate the notion that Black women are "angry," just imagine if white America said that very same thing about Blacks (and they do) when objecting to the racial injustice presently on display within the Black Lives Matter movement.

It's truly a sad day in Black America that (some) Black men can't seem to stand in solidarity with Black women. 

Because if they won't stand up, who will?

  

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION (RACE-BASED) FOR COLLEGE ADMISSION UPHELD BY SCOTUS 4-3

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION (RACE-BASED) FOR COLLEGE ADMISSION UPHELD BY SCOTUS 4-3:

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION KICKS OPEN THE DOOR FOR EQUAL OPPORTUNITY IN AMERICA.

ELENA KAGAN RECUSED HERSELF.

Sources: NY Times, NBC News, YouTube

****** Supreme Court Upholds Affirmative Action Program at University of Texas

 The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a challenge to a race-conscious admissions program at the University of Texas at Austin, handing supporters of affirmative action a major victory.

The vote was 4-3. 

Only seven justices participated in the decision, as Justice Elena Kagan had recused herself for prior work on the case as United States solicitor general and the late Justice Antonin Scalia’s seat remains vacant.

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote the majority opinion, joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor. 

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr., dissented.

The case concerned the University of Texas’ idiosyncratic admissions program. 

Most applicants from within the state are admitted under a part of the program that guarantees admission to top students in every high school in the state.

 (This is often called the Top 10 Percent program, though the percentage cutoff can vary by year.)

The Top 10 Percent program has produced significant racial and ethnic diversity. In 2011, for instance, 26 percent of freshmen who enrolled under the program were Hispanic, and 6 percent were black. Texas is about 38 percent Hispanic and 12 percent black.

The case challenged a second part of the admissions program. 

Under it, remaining students from Texas and elsewhere are considered under standards that take into account academic achievement and other factors, including race and ethnicity. 

Many colleges and universities base all of their admissions decisions on such holistic grounds.

In Grutter v. Bollinger in 2003, the Supreme Court endorsed free-standing admissions programs, saying it was permissible to consider race as one factor among many to achieve educational diversity. 

Writing for the majority in that case, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor said she expected that “25 years from now,” the “use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary.”

The case, Fisher v. University of Texas, No. 14-981, was brought by Abigail Fisher, a white woman who said the university had denied her admission based on her race. 

She has since graduated from Louisiana State University.

When the court last considered Ms. Fisher’s case in 2013, supporters of affirmative action were nervous. 

But the court deferred conclusive action in what appeared to be a compromise decision.

JESUS CHRIST'S RACE NO LONGER MATTERS TO ME

JESUS CHRIST'S RACE NO LONGER MATTERS TO ME:

I HOPE HIS COLOR & RACE DOESN'T MATTER TO YOU EITHER.

Merry Christmas Everyone!

"For unto us a Child is Born, unto us a Son is given." Isaiah 9:6

On today December 25th we celebrate the Birth of JESUS CHRIST.

Even though JESUS was actually born in the month of SEPTEMBER, due to the Judeo-Christian calendar we celebrate his Birthday on December 25.

We all know JESUS was a real Human Being, born in the Middle East to JEWISH parents.

As a curious Christian, I used to be caught up in Foolish arguments about JESUS' race, his Skin color, Eye color and Hair texture.

But no more!

I no longer care what Color JESUS was because such arguments keep Human Beings divided and at odds about Race Relations.

I now only care about the Truth of JESUS' Birth, his Ministry on Earth, his Crucifixion, his Resurrection and Ascension into Heaven where he now sits beside his Heavenly Father GOD Almighty.

Hallejuah!

~ Insisting Jesus Was White Is Bad History and Bad Theology

In trying to police his depiction, Megyn Kelly is wrong on both the facts and the essential universality of the Christian message.

Fox News television host Megyn Kelly told viewers on her December 11 broadcast that Jesus and Santa are both white men.

"Just because it makes you feel uncomfortable doesn't mean it has to change," Kelly said. "Jesus was a white man, too. It's like we have, he's a historical figure that's a verifiable fact, as is Santa, I just want kids to know that. How do you revise it in the middle of the legacy in the story and change Santa from white to black?"

Setting aside the ridiculousness of creating rigidly racial depictions of a fictitious character that does not actually exist—sorry, kids—like Santa, Kelly has made a more serious error about Jesus.

The scholarly consensus is actually that Jesus was, like most first-century Jews, probably a dark-skinned man. If he were taking the red-eye flight from San Francisco to New York today, Jesus might be profiled for additional security screening by TSA.

The myth of a white Jesus is one with deep roots throughout Christian history. As early as the Middle Ages and particularly during the Renaissance, popular Western artists depicted Jesus as a white man, often with blue eyes and blondish hair.

Perhaps fueled by some Biblical verses correlating lightness with purity and righteousness and darkness with sin and evil, these images sought to craft a sterile Son of God.

The only problem was that the representations were historically inaccurate.

Modern Western Christians have carried these images over into their own depictions of Jesus. Pick up a one of those bright blue “Bible Story” books in a Sunday School classroom and you’ll find white Jesus waiting for you, rosy cheeks and all. Or you could survey the light-skinned Jesus in any number of modern TV or film portrayals, including History Channel’s hit series The Bible.

Interestingly, the Bible is far less descriptive on the matter of Jesus’ skin color than we are. Christian scriptures say very little about Jesus’ physical appearance. They do not comment on his nose, eye color, skin pigmentation, or hair.

The glaring exception is Isaiah 53:2, which prophesies that the messiah won’t be much to look at, another fact that places the Bible at odds with the “well-groomed surfer-dude Jesus” who's often put forth.

If the Bible is silent on the matter of Jesus’ skin color, does it really matter that Megyn Kelly says Jesus is white?

Yes, actually.

As some historians and theologians have posited, the silence of the Scriptures on the issue of Jesus’ skin color is critical to Christianity’s broad appeal with people of various ethnicities. In a world where race often divides communities and even churches, the Biblical depictions of God’s son positions him as one who can bridge those divides.

For this reason, one American Presbyterian minister in the 1880s warned his flock not to trust popular images of Christ:

If He were particularised and localised—if, for example, He were made a man with a pale face—then the man of the ebony face would feel that there was a greater distance between Christ and him than between Christ and his white brother.’ Instead, because the Bible refused to describe Jesus in terms of racial features, his gospel could appeal to all.

Only in this way could the Church be a place where the ‘Caucasian and Mongolian and African sit together at the Lord’s table, and we all think alike of Jesus, and we all feel that He is alike our brother’.

In Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Advice for Living” column for Ebony in 1957, the civil-rights leader was asked, “Why did God make Jesus white, when the majority of peoples in the world are non-white?” King replied, “The color of Jesus’ skin is of little or no consequence” because what made Jesus exceptional “His willingness to surrender His will to God’s will.”

His point, as historian Edward Blum has noted, is that Jesus transcends race.

Those warnings hold just as true for believers today. Within the church, eschewing a Jesus who looks more like a Scandinavian supermodel than the sinless Son of God in the scriptures is critical to maintaining a faith in which all can give praise to one who became like them in an effort to save them from sins like racism and prejudice.

It's important for Christians who want to expand the church, too, in allowing the creation of communities that are able to worship a Jesus who builds bridges rather than barriers.

And it is essential to enabling those who bear the name of Christ to look forward to that day when, according to the book of Revelation, those “from every nation, tribe, people, and language” can worship God together.

Until that day arrives, though, can someone please tell Megyn Kelly that Jesus is not white?

Sources: The Atlantic, Fox News, YouTube

FERGUSON Race Riots Being Encouraged By Liberal Media Networks Like CNN

CNN vs FERGUSON:

INCITING RACE RIOTS FOR RATINGS

CNN wants the Citizens of FERGUSON and Protesters to create another Race RIOT.

Why??

To Achieve Higher Network Ratings So CNN Execs Can Attract More Sponsors!

Dear People Of Ferguson,

Please don't allow CNN'S Racially-Biased reporting to Brainwash your minds into committing more acts of Counterproductive Destruction, which may lead to VIOLENCE or more BLACK People being KILLED by FERGUSON'S Police officers as MICHAEL BROWN was.

Please THINK before you ACT!

I'm Praying for all of You.

Regards,

BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ

Lassiter Wins Charlotte Primary With 8,516+ Votes!...Early Sign Of November Victory

GOP's Lassiter will face Foxx in Fall's Mayoral race


Despite a dismal turnout, Charlotte voters Tuesday set up the city's most competitive mayoral race in years, helped three city council members survive challenges and made a former incumbent the top vote-getter in his party.

Barely more than 4 percent of voters went to the polls in the Primaries.

Republican John Lassiter, boosted by higher turnout in southeast Charlotte, handily turned back two primary challengers for a long-anticipated contest against Democrat Anthony Foxx. The winner will become the city's first new Mayor in 14 years.

Three council incumbents – Democrats Nancy Carter, Patsy Kinsey and James Mitchell – easily won their primaries. That means that five of the seven district members are guaranteed seats. Only in two southeast Charlotte districts will voters have a choice in November.

Cannon's back, Belk is out

With Democrats already holding a 5-2 edge in district seats, control of council is expected to turn on the race for four at-large seats.

Despite being out of office for four years, former council member Patrick Cannon led incumbent Susan Burgess and two newcomers on the Democratic ticket. Cannon carried more than 100 precincts across the city.

On the Republican side, at-large incumbent Edwin Peacock III will lead a ticket with three newcomers. Not among them, however, was Georgia Belk.

Despite her well-known name and solid fundraising – she raised more than every Republican but Peacock – she finished fifth. Some voters blamed her association with her husband, controversial Mecklenburg District Judge Bill Belk.

“I was afraid some of his shenanigans might be an influence on her,” said Republican Dot Hailey, a retired teacher voting in east Charlotte.

The facets of race, protest

Democrats hope to win their first mayoral race since 1987, when Harvey Gantt won a second term. The primaries leave the party with a ticket that features its first African American mayoral candidate since Gantt and three black at-large candidates. They'll face an all-white Republican slate.

Charlotte has never had a race with a black mayoral candidate and more than two African Americans running at-large. Though African Americans make up around a third of city voters, UNC Charlotte political scientist Ted Arrington said Democrats will have to buck history.

“It's going to be very difficult if people vote along racial lines – and they do,” Arrington said. “It imperils Foxx … That's a very important factor in what happens in November. History tells us that. People who think we're ‘post-racial' on voting just haven't looked at the facts.”

Foxx doesn't expect Race to be an issue.

“What people want is the Leadership,” he said Tuesday. “It's going to be the responsibility of everybody running, white, black or otherwise, to be real good about explaining why people ought to vote … We've got the makings of a very, very strong ticket.”

Lassiter said Race shouldn't be an issue.

“I have visited churches in the African American community (and) the Hispanic community,” he said. “The obligation of the next mayor is to understand and embrace the diversity of Charlotte.”

While Democrats hope to build on last fall, when Pres. Barack Obama lifted other Democrats to victory in the county, Republicans hope to catch the energy of this summer's protests over health care and government spending.

Two of the GOP at-large candidates nominated Tuesday – Matthew Ridenhour and Tariq Bokhari – helped lead Tea Party protests this year. Lassiter believes such protests have energized his party's base.

“Even though they're focused primarily on national issues, they're excited,” he said.




Charlotte City Council overrides streetcar veto

Charlotte's streetcar was revived Monday night when the Charlotte City Council voted 7-4 to override Mayor Pat McCrory's veto on spending $4.5 million to design it.

After an hour-long debate, council member Warren Turner, a Democrat who represents west Charlotte, cast the deciding vote in favor.

Last month, McCrory vetoed a plan to pay URS Corp. $4.5 million to start design work on the line, which would run from Beatties Ford Road to Eastland Mall, via uptown. He argued that because of the recession, the city needed to cut its spending. He and other Republicans said it wasn't prudent to spend the money when Charlotte doesn't have a plan to pay for the line, which could cost $450 million.

But the council's Democratic majority said it was important to get the project started. They hope the Federal government will change its rules to pay for streetcar construction, and they argued by spending the money now the city would be first in line.

Council member Nancy Carter, who represents east Charlotte, said the vote was “crucial.”

She said that building the streetcar to Eastland Mall would spur efforts to redevelop the dying retail center.



View Larger Map


Sources: Charlotte Observer, Meck. Board of Elections, Charmeck.org, Youtube, Google Maps

Do They Hate President Obama because he's Black?

"They hate him because he's black".

On the heels of the "Tax Day Tea Party" protests which took place on April 15Th while visiting the Daily kos (one of my favorite blogs), I came across a soul stirring post on that site entitled "They hate him because he's black".
The submission was authored by a regular DK contributor named Turka.

In the post she refers to President Obama as a Black man rather than an African-American. A Black man who dared to infiltrate the previous "White Only Leaders of the Free World" club.

As you can tell by Turka's penned thoughts, she describes the deep hatred towards our new president stirring up across the country among certain groups with a brooding, though-provoking aura.

Racial Hatred hidden behind false concerns for the well-being of our nation's future.

Here's an excerpt:

"I deliberately use the word black rather than the words African American. The latter lacks the proper emotional value. It is cultural and geographical. The former is visceral. Bigotry is not subtle. It is primal. It is not about ideas. It is irrational."

"He is smarter and more educated and more articulate than they. A self-made man, he represents everything they would claim to value. But he looks different, to them. They hate him because he looks different. They hate him because he is dark. In "Western" "Culture," the very words black and dark have powerfully negative value. They often are used as synonyms for the sinister."


Thanks to the mainstream Media, by now we are all aware of the false concerns I'm speaking of: "President Obama is turning our country into a Socialist regime", "President Obama included too much spending in his Stimulus package", "President Obama wants to use the government to kill Free Enterprise". Yes, those types of false concerns.

Of course I highly recommend that you read Turka's article, however more so I recommend you conduct a thorough self-evaluation regarding what you really feel and think about President Obama's election.

Are you genuinely concerned for the future of our nation or......do you too hate him and Michelle because they're Black?

MSNBC reporters discuss Texas Governor Rick Perry's threats to secede.



Sources: Daily Kos, TPM, Huffington Post, MSNBC, Newsweek, Youtube, Flickr

First Lady Michelle Obama's U.K. Wardrobe Makes U.S. Proud!

Last week during her trip to London with hubby President Obama, Michelle (his better half) created quite a buzz and wowed everyone she encountered with her Style, Beauty, Grace and Intelligence.

Yes Michelle is a First Lady all women can be proud of, not just the privileged few.

This rings especially true among African-American women who for too long have been wrongly stereotyped as Angry, Militant, Hard to get along with, Bitter members of lower society.

She is a Wife, Mother, Daughter, Sister, Friend, Businesswoman, Confidante', etc., however notice I did NOT say Maid, Superwoman or "Baby Mama".

Not only that she's also TALL and Slim! Darn it!

No wonder Prez. Obama smiles so bright whenever he's seen with her and just because he's a Politician no I don't think his smile is fake when appearing with his wife.

Michelle is so admired that all the world clamored to know what she was wearing while in Europe.

Its no secret the Media just can't get enough of Mrs. Obama.

Can you blame them? After all she broke protocol by hugging Queen Elizabeth and in the world of PR still came forth smelling like a rose.

Face it people, Michelle Obama is gorgeous! Am I jealous? Let's just say that I'm over it now and free to celebrate her success with the rest of mankind.

Go on Michelle and keep it up girl with your bad self!

P.S.

For more of the world's love affair with Michelle Obama check out her latest interview in the May issue of Essence magazine.

Sources: MSNBC, Fabsugar, Telegraph.uk.co, Jack and Jill Politics, NY Times, Miami Herald, News-record.com