When John Russell “Rusty” Houser was evicted from [his] quiet corner house in March 2014, sheriffs said, he trashed the place, dousing it in paint and gasoline and stuffing concrete down its pipes.Probably because Homeland In-Security is too busy surveying the Black Lives Matter Movement
When the new home-owners decided to renovate, they had to call the fire department twice in one day after booby-trapped doors burst into flames.
“There was some tampering with the gas line that ran into the fireplaces,” said Russell County Sheriff Heath Taylor. Tracie Chancey, who has lived on 32nd Street with her husband and children since 2007, feared that the arson could have been much worse. “It shook us up when we found out what he did to that home.”And even after that he was walking around free and with access to guns. What a country.
As if to echo the FBI surveillance of the civil rights movement and Black liberation organizations in the 1960s, The Intercept has learned through a Freedom of Information Act request that the Department of Homeland Security has been monitoring the Black Lives Matter movement since its formation in the protests of Ferguson.
“The reports confirm social media surveillance of the protest movement and ostensibly related events in the cities of Ferguson, Baltimore, Washington, DC, and New York. They also show the department watching over gatherings that seem benign and even mundane. For example, DHS circulated information on a nationwide series of silent vigils and a DHS-funded agency planned to monitor a funk music parade and a walk to end breast cancer in the nation’s capital,” according to George Joseph in the Intercept report.
Joseph also raises the question as to whether DHS, which was formed largely to combat terrorism, has engaged in mission creep as its budget has exceeded $60 billion.
Louisiana Shooting Suspect Obtained Gun Legally, Had Extensive Criminal History In Georgia http://t.co/w3J3lNtYlv How is this ok, America?
— Propane Jane (@docrocktex26) July 27, 2015
How indeed.Fear of the Black Gun Owner, white gun owners not so much.
The fear of blacks with guns was one of the reasons behind the Supreme Court’s notorious decision in the Dred Scott case. Chief Justice Roger Taney’s opinion insisted that blacks could not be citizens because, if they were, they’d have all the protections of the Bill of Rights, including the right to “full liberty of speech... to hold public meetings on political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went.”
America’s most horrific racist organization, the Ku Klux Klan, began with gun control at the very top of its agenda. Before the Civil War, blacks in the South had never been allowed to possess guns. During the war, however, blacks obtained guns for the first time. Some served as soldiers in black units in the Union Army, which allowed its men, black and white, to take their guns home with them as partial payment of past due wages.
Next month, the Supreme Court will take up a challenge to the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the most effective law of its kind in the history of the United States. A century after the Civil War, the act, in abolishing many forms of discrimination employed by the Southern states, such as poll taxes and literacy tests, finally turned the legal right for African-Americans in those states to vote into an actual right to vote. Bipartisan congressional majorities have reauthorized the law four times, most recently in 2006. (It passed the House overwhelmingly and the Senate unanimously, and was signed into law by George W. Bush.) The question now is whether the Supreme Court will strike down the Voting Rights Act as a violation of states’ rights.
Gun violence saturates our children’s lives and relentlessly threatens them every day. It has romped through their playgrounds; invaded their birthday parties; terrorized their Head Start classrooms, child care centers, and schools; frolicked down the streets they walk to and from school; danced through their school buses; waited at the red light and bus stop; lurked behind trees; run them down on the corner; shot them through their bedroom windows, on their front porches, and in their neighborhoods.
As the southerners who love Auburn football celebrate their championship, they may want to take a second to absorb a couple of sobering realities. First, the school got $21 million just for winning that one game. Auburn’s coach, Gene Chizik is due for a multi-million dollar bonus and millions will flow into the pockets of administrators, coaches, commentators, and corporate sponsors, almost none of whom are black.
At the same time, the star players for Auburn, including Heisman Trophy winner Cam Newton, will simply get to throw up the “A” to their boys, and some will live off this short moment of glory for a lifetime. Like preventing slaves from learning how to read, the NCAA has created laws making it illegal for Cam, his family or the families of any of the other players to get any of those millions that coaches are gladly putting into their pockets. All the while, Auburn will be searching for the next batch of big, black bucks who can win them more championships. Like chickens being grown by KFC, black males are a commodity that Auburn University can’t live without.
If you are one of the thousands of black families sending your son or daughter to the NCAA to build their multi-billion dollar coffers, they would tell you that paying the athletes or their families is simply impossible. They would convince you that in spite of the fact that the athletes and their families are the most important part of their revenue-generating process, universities simply cannot afford to share their money. Even if you are homeless and your child can’t buy groceries, you must stand to the side as others earn millions from your child’s athletic labor
The system was created by Homeland Security Presidential Directive 3 on March 11, 2002, in response to the September 11 attacks. It was meant to provide a "comprehensive and effective means to disseminate information regarding the risk of terrorist acts to Federal, State, and local authorities and to the American people." It was unveiled March 12, 2002, by Tom Ridge, then the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security. However, responsibility for developing, implementing and managing the system was given to the U.S. Attorney General.
In January 2003, the new Department of Homeland Security (DHS) began administering the system. The decision to publicly announce threat conditions is made by the Secretary of Homeland Security in consultation with the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security, according to Homeland Security Presidential Directive-5.[1]
Folks must call the Arizona shootings exactly what they are; acts of terrorism. Whether the shooter is white, black, or brown equal scrutiny should be given to a person who commits crimes of this nature. A person’s religion and the length of his name should not determine how the crime is reported. A terrorist is a terrorist. Because many allow the media to shape their thoughts and drive the conversation, the media helps facilitate racial flames at its leisure. The political pundits are carefully picked for their skills at stroking the audiences depending on what outlet you watch. Dumb pundits are chosen to play down a point and hateful pundits are picked to create more intolerance. They play us like puppets
The shootings in Tucson should be of concern to everyone. There are millions of people who already feel aggrieved and angry and they have now been incited by right wing invective calling for “Second Amendment remedies.”
Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), the incoming chair of the Energy and Commerce Committee, whetted conservative appetites early in the year when he pledged not only to push for repeal of the president's health care reform law, but also suggested that the votes would be there to override a veto in the House.