Sicilian1's Blog

Expert Opinion and Commentary

sicilian1: MICHAEL JACKSON: A Tribute

 July, 6 2009 @7:00pm

  This post is definitely belated. Thoughts have been bouncing around in my head and emotions have been pulling me every which way since Michael died about a week ago. I just had to give Michael my own little tribute and I hope I do this wonderful man some justice, because though I never met him personally, he still meant alot to me and impacted my life in a joyful way ever since I was a little kid.

I LOOOOOOOOOVED Michael Jackson.

   I don’t know if I cribbed this from someone or if I patched it together from different commentators then assumed it for myself. But I’ve been saying it for a long time:

If you take Michael at the hieght of his fame (probably the Thriller/Bad era) and match him up against any celebrity in the history of the world at the hieght of that celebrity’s fame, NO one will ever even come close to comparing to Michael. When Michael was at the hieght of his fame NO one could ever even come within hailing distance of him. And that fact will stand for ALL time.

   I thank God for alot of things, but when I looked back at Michael’s life, I said a special thank you to the “Man” upstairs for allowing me not only to be alive during Michael’s life but for allowing  me to be born in that specific age bracket where I was able to experience the full capacity of the life and times of “The King of Pop”.

    I go back to the Jackson 5. As a little kid I had my 8-track cassette of the Jackson 5 that I’d take into my room and listen to for hours untill I wore the thing out. My mom bought me a Jackson 5 Christmas 8-track that we’d play every year untill the 8-track finally broke. I used to love Michael’s rendition of “Mommy kissing Santa Claus”, asking my mom if it was really true what Michael was singing.

    When “Off the Wall” came out I remembered how much I loved “Rock wit You” and still consider it my 2nd favorite  song of all time behind, “Billie Jean”. After I grew up I got back in touch w/the “Off the Wall” album and couldn’t believe how many timeless hits were on that record. (Don’t stop, She’s out of my life, Off the wall, etc.)

  Then Thriller came out and it changed the world. I still remember everyone with their red “Beat-It” jackets and studded “Billie Jean” glove. Who wasn’t trying to master the “moonwalk” in ’83? And all anyone wanted for Christmas was the Michael Thriller album. Then just when Thriller was losing steam, Michael performed “Billie Jean” and unvieled the “moonwalk” on the Motown 25 anniversary and suddenly an unstoppable wave of Michael mania swept the world. I’ll never forget going to school the next day and everybody talking about what they saw the night before. I didn’t know a girl, no matter the race or age, who wasn’t in love with Michael. For me, I never felt scared about admitting my unabashed love for Michael. Michael was never a guilty pleasure like Niel Diamond or Barry Manilow who you listen to when you’re alone in your car with the windows rolled up then quickly change the tape before you hit your block.

     The greatness of Thriller goes without saying and alot of people like to say that was Michael’s high-water mark. But for me, arguably, “Bad” may have been his best album. (Bad, The way you make me feel, Man in the Mirror, Dirty Diana, Another Part of Me, Leave Me Alone). Bad is where Michael started to express himself while answering and challenging his critics. Here we were introduced to a more edgy Michael; the defiance, crotch-grabbing, macho, trash-talking, screaming, etc. The beauty of all that was that Michael could express who he was (Bad), make a political and humane statement (Man in the Mirror) , show some machismo (The Way You Make Me Feel), talk-trash (Leave Me Alone), engage in existential inquiry of self (Another Part of Me) all while cementing his status as the “King of Pop”.

    “Bad” proved that he was more than just some sugar-coated, pre-packaged pop artist, singing cookie-cutter songs to a hip beat. Michael could touch the fans that were only listening for the entertainment value while at the same time sending a message to prove that he was not some robot but a person who had some deep insights and feelings.

    Michael showed how diverse he was as an artist on “Bad”. While “Thriller” was innovative with the Eddie Van Halen guitar solo on “Beat It’, the Vincent Price “Rap” on “Thriller” and the phatest beat bar none in the history of music with “Billie Jean”, (Tell me what person with blood flowing through their viens doesn’t get excited when the bass on “Billie Jean” kicks off?), it was still an album grounded in Michael’s R&B roots. But “Bad” crossed all genre’s. “Dirty Diana” was a straight rock song that any of the “hair bands” that were popular at the time could’ve put on their album and sold it with a straight face to their fans.

    My favorite song off “Bad” was “The Way You Make Me Feel”. This song was enhanced all the more by the video. To digress for a moment, it can not be understated what Michael meant to the visual medium of a pop artist. Michael melded song and video like never before or since. Michael made it a requirment to have a video to go along with a song. But it couldn’t be just some generic concert flick. With Michael as the innovator video’s became mini-movies where the message of the song’s words were conveyed through the story on  the screen.

    Getting back to, “The Way You Make Me Feel”. At the time there was the rumor and innuendo about Michael’s sexuality. Well, if anybody heard that song or saw that video they would know that it is an experssion of street, macho, misoginy at it’s best or if you prefer worst. Michael, like the best “macho” “thug” was saying to the girl in the video; ‘you’re hot, I want you and I got enough game to make you want this’. That’s how a true “player” would operate; no romance, no chivalry, just the attitude that he’s not going to get fooled by her coquettish ‘hard-to-get’ routine because even if she don’t know, he knows that she wants him, so, ‘what’s up?’ That video had me convinced that Michael liked girls.

     But Michael was still pumping out the hits with his next album, “Dangerous”. (Black or White, Remember the Time, In the Closet, Jam, Heal the World). Again Michael displayed his ability to deliver pop hits while expressing his inner thoughts and feelings and also including a message song or two. For relatively the same reasons I liked “The Way You Make Me Feel” from the “Bad” album, I loved, “In the Closet” from the “Dangerous” album.

    In this song and video Michael was doing his best  Joe Pesci from “Goodfella’s”, ‘so you think I’m funny how? imitation. The rumors about Michael’s sexuality persisted. So it was as if Michael was saying, ‘what, you think I’m gay?’, ‘are you sure you think I don’t like girls?’, ‘are you really sure about that?’

Well, Michael had something for all of us. He put Naomi Campbell in the video and proceeded to sex-her-up like nobody could. Michael had always sexed the female dancers he interacted with HARD. But he sexed-up Naomi SUPER-HARD. If anybody ever had any questions about Michael’s sexuality or if he liked girls, they were put to rest forever after that video. There is NO way Michael could’ve sexed Naomi up the way he did if he didn’t like girls. After seeing that I would’ve never wanted my woman around Michael because that video was evidence that if Michael REALLY wanted to, he could take anybody’s woman.

   Michael put out hits as long as he put out records. On his last record he had the hit, “You Rock My World”. That song was hot in 2001, it ‘s hot today, it would’ve been hot in ’82 and it will be hot 100 years from now. Who thinks that if Michael put out another album he wouldn’t have had another hit?

   Michael was the consumate “pop” artist. Not only did he tanscend races but he transcended cultures, ages, sexes, nations, and taste. As far as that last point, it didn’t matter if you were a rock-n-roll guy, an R&B guy, a Hip-Hopper, a headbanger, liked the hair-bands, dance hall, it didn’t matter. Michael’s core audience was the world. Everybody liked Michael and they didn’t have to be embarrassed about saying so.

    Somebody said to me that, ‘the moonwalk was nothing knew’, because they saw Sammy Davis, Jr. do it. Maybe Michael did crib it from Sammy. Maybe he cribbed from James Brown, Elvis, Stevie Wonder, The Beattles and who knows who else. But who cares? And you know why? Because NOBODY ever put it all together like Michael and NOBODY ever did it better than him. That is a fact. And what also is a fact is that NOBODY ever will. Having lived through the Michael experience, I can truthfully say that none of these psuedo R&B boy bands or solo artisis impress me in the least with all they faux dance moves that are nothing but straight inferior plagerized moves from Michael. Michael laid it all down for all time. Nowadays an artist thinks that the more acrobatics they do the better dancer it makes them. But Michael had moves, real Fred Astaire dance moves.

     And don’t ever take anything away from Michael’s singing chops. While Michael always possessed a soulful voice that in his younger days was bigger than his age, for me as he got older his voice became the definition of silky smoothness. What other singer ever made the transition from child, to teenager, to young man to adult while being bold enough to change vocal styles and still maintain a relevant and beautiful sound, tone, interpretation and meaning through each progressing stage.

     Knowing the tough life Michael had, it saddened me that a man who brought so much joy to so many had so much pain and what I percieved to be demons gnawing at his soul. The only time Michael seemed to be at peace was when he was on stage performing for his fans. He was such an unbelievable entertainer that not only did he get intrinsic value from performing but the intrinsic value he gave to his fans gladdened him all the more.

  I remember Michael’s 30th anniversary performance at MSG in 2001 when at the end of the show Chris Tucker came out and did Michael’s signature leg kick, as he was known to do. They interacted for several seconds then Michael put his hands on Chris’ shoulders and eventually fell to the stage in laughter over Tucker’s antics. That image probably made the most impact on me. It showed the humanity of Michael and caught him having fun just like any old normal person.

    I thank Michael from the absolute bottom of my heart for sharing his life with the world and bringing so much happiness to so many just by doing what came naturally to him. He was a great human being and I pray that his soul eternally rests in peace.

July 6, 2009 Posted by | blog, culture, entertainment, health, history, Life, music, news, people, personal, philosohy, Politics, random, thoughts | 4 Comments

sicilian1: Honduras, A Preview for America

    On Sunday there was a “coup d’etat” in Honduras. With the full backing of the congress, the courts and the military, President Manuel Zelaya was forced to leave the country and replaced with an interim President, Robert Micheletti.

   Zelaya was elected as president four years ago and quickly and transparently aligned himself with socialist tyrants like Chavez and Castro. Honduras was almost immediately grounded in a quicksand of political corruption and back-washing. As his nation sunk deeper into poverty, Zelaya resorted to the usual progressive/socialist/elitist trick by fabricating a bogey-man. He laid the trouble for his nations downturn at the feet of the elites. This is the classic blame tactic of the socialist/progressive types like Zelaya; they transpose their own faults on their opponents, demonizing them with ad hominem attacks to divert the issue from their failed and corrupt policies.

    Zelaya argued that in order to fix things he needed more time in office. He ordered a national referendum whereby he could alter the Constitution and run for re-election. The Democratic apparatus of Honduras refused to allow Zelaya to get away with his power grab. Undettered this arrogant pushed forward nevertheless. When the military rejected his demand to support his referendum, Zelaya fired his general. When the Supreme Court ruled the firing unjust, Zelaya ignored their decision and once again resorted to the socialist/progressive ad hominem rhetorical tactic of demonization by accussing the Court of being tools for the elites and acting as an obstacle for democracy.

    On Sunday the Congress, the courts and the military forced Zelaya on a plane to Costa Rica. This was NOT the “coup d’etat” which the media is portraying it to be. This was the unified action of a desperate nation to end the machinations of a would-be tyrant who was trying to usurp the Constitution of Honduras in order to turn this poverty-stricken nation into his personal fiefdom.

     Zelaya looked around the Americas and saw what worked for his nieghbors (Chavez/Castro); an endless game of vicious blame politics where the ignorant massess are whipped into a frenzy of hate as they attack whatever boogey-man has been constructed as the excuse for their plight. With Chavez and all his oil money, Zelaya was ready to become a bought and paid minion to spew whatever rhetoric Chavez deemed to be useful to himself.

   The reason why I mention this is because this could be a preview for what could be in store for the United Staes. President Obama’s public satement was that he was, “Deeply concerened.” You better believe he is.

    The next big bill before the senate after healthcare will be the amnesty bill. If Obama and his progressive thugs are successful in ramming that legislation through and ALL the illegal aliens become legal, a “super” voting bloc will be created that will be absolutely insurmountable for any opposing candidate to overcome. That is the progressives aim; to legalize the illegals which will make ALL the hispanics, who are classified as an “historicall disadvantaged” group, immediately eligible for EVERY affirmative action civil right benefit. All these so-called “non-profit”, “community organizations”, that stear these “historically disadvantaged” groups to the gov’t  “free-bee’s” and are really nothing more than the “foot-soldiers” for the progressive power structure,  will make it  clear to their clients that as payment they are to vote for the specific progressive candidate. So once amnesty is granted it is GAME OVER.

   But, we’re not there yet and Obama has his contingencies. Remember the EFOCA (The gravest misnomer there has ever been). That was basically the union “card-check” bill where the unions wanted to do away with the secret ballot. Well, mark my words, that’ll be Obama’s first tactic. If things aren’t going his way he’ll introduce a “card-check” bill for the general election. Anyone oppossing it will be branded a racist, that if they’re not willing to forego the secret ballot it’s only because they want to hide behind their “sheets” and engage in their closet racist attitudes. The govn’t controlled media will hail this “card-check” as a great thing; ‘that it’ll expose the racist out there’ and ‘what do you have to hide anyway.’ The psuedo black panther thugs will be stationed at every voting booth in America (They’ll probably be on the Acorn payroll) making sure every voter votes as they “should.”

    If the “card-check” tactic is not successful, whether it be after this first term or if (God forbid) the messiah is finishing up a second term, a referendum much like the one Zelaya introduced will be introduced by Obama. If things look bad it’ll be after the first term. Obama will employ the same method of Zelaya; never taking blame, pointing the finger at the big mess he inherited from Bush and that HE HIMSELF, the ANNOINTED MESSIAH of MESSIAH’S NEEDS to be ensured of another 4 years to see his policies to fruition and guide America on the path HE HIMSELF deems it should journey. If he gets a second term and things are still going bad (Which I envision they will be), he’ll still employ the same rhetoric as an excuse for extending to a 3rd, 4th, 5th, however many terms it takes untill he finally declares himself ruler for life.

     If every democratic institution bucks against Obama’s tyrannical power grab, he’ll do the same thing Zelaya is doing now. Zelaya is before the United Nations portraying himself as the poor victim of a military overthrow. He is calling on the international community to show it’s support in re-enstating him as President of Honduras as a “defense of democracy.”

   Isn’t it always like the progressives to drape themselves in a faux higher level of altruism when it is they in fact who are the tyrants desiring to ensalve their peoples as pawns to achieve their selfish ends. They always paint their opponents as the “bad-guys” and themselves as the “victims” when in fact it is the absolute reverse. It is always their own tyranny, their own end of self-absorbed utopia justifying the oppressive means of their actions that eventually leads to their downfall. They always wrap themselves in populus rhetoric when in fact they are the eternal enemy of the populus. It is the progressives lack of respect for each and every individual human being that causes them to lump each individual human being into certain “groups” and convince them that what’s good for the “group” is good for them and what’s good for affiliated “groups” is good for their “group” and then play certain “groups” off one another convincing a certain “group” that another certain “group” is their eternal enemy the whole time amassing more and more power for themselves as they create more “groups” in their own camp. Because the progressives adgenda is to divide and conquer by having all the “groups” competing for the same govn’t pie he controls.

    So in due time Obama will further demonize his opponents to first institute “card-check” in the general election, then to introduce referendum’s to first do away with the 2-term limit for presidents if not to do away with term limits for presidents all together. Then if none of that works and things really go awry and he finds himself in front of the United Nations pleading his case, don’t be surprised if this ego-maniac with his messianic complex tries to barter his way into having the Untied Nations just outright declare him the King of the World.

    So when Obama says he’s, “deeply concerned” about the goings-on in Honduras, you better believe he is.

   But remember if you believe any of this to be true you may in fact be a RACIST!!!

   Me on the other hand am “bullet-proof.” If you don’t believe me then read my past blogs. I am NOT coming from some white-supremecist ideology. I have black people in my family and mixed kids so my views are only motivated by the truth. I just call them as I see them.

June 30, 2009 Posted by | blog, culture, history, Life, news, people, personal, philosohy, Politics, random, thoughts | 1 Comment

sicilian1: Obama, One Down, Two To Go.

   The cap-and-trade legislation was introduced on Thursday June 25th, 2009 and voted on and passed on Friday June 26th, 2009. One day, that’s how long it took for the government to make it’s biggest grab of the economy in the history of this country’s exsistence (Forget about the bailouts, they pale in comparison to this) and to take away more of the liberties of it’s citizens than ever before. Know this for a fact, once the particular’s of this legislation are implemented the lives of every American citizen will never be the same.

     This cap-and-trade legislation was a bill 1,201 pages in length introduced one day and then voted on the next. The only congressmen who probably read it were it’s raging progressive author’s Rep. Waxman (D-CA) and Rep. Markey (D-MA). How inconscionable is it for any politician, no matter how good the bill may be, to vote in the affirmative of a piece of legislation they have never even had the chance to read. These representitives are voted on by the citizens of this great nation to repesent the citizenry and protect the best interests of those they represent. The founding Father’s set up a system where there was suppossed to be a rich round of debate where ideas were given the chance to be explicated, where the affects of certain laws and legislation were suppossed to be disected to shed light onto how they would effect the people, where these laws and legislation would be ammended to ensure the interests of the people were served untill they were voted upon. Now I ask, how could any of those principles be honored when a 1,201 page bill gets voted into law a day after it’s introduction.

   As I said the only people who probably know what’s in the bill are the minions of Waxman and Markey who wrote it. Now what do the partisian progressives in the house who voted in the affirmative really care about what’s in the bill as long as they’ve been assured that the progressive, government power-grabbing adgenda that will serve the will of their great messiah Obama has been met. These hacks do not care about serving the citizens who voted them into office, their only purpose is to do the bidding of the thug Obama and vote his party and government as much power as possible.

     Nobody really even knows what’s in the bill but in a nutshell cap-and-trade works something like this; corporations get a cap put on how much green-house gases they emit and they are taxed to the hilt. Obviously as the corporations taxes to the government rise, they pass on the cost on to the consumer. So get ready to pull out the blankets because energy costs for every American are about to go through the roof. The “trade” part comes into play when these corporations start trading the energy rations handed out by the government back and forth. Oh yes, the great protector of the people our one and only annointed one has just created another boon-doggle for corporate America.

   Now the real little trick is this; because the government is going to tax the ‘you-know-what’ out of fossil-fuels, they will in turn make wind and solar “seem” cost efficent. The fact of reality is that gas, oil and coal are the most cost effective forms of energy. The simple reason is that they do NOT have to be harnessed. You just drill or mine for them then burn them. On the other hand wind and solar have to be harnessed and the ability to harness them is very inconsistent. That is why they have never replaced fossil fuels. Don’t even mention the “evil” that is nuclear energy, bring that up and you’ll be demonized by the progressive crowd as some sort of abomination willing to endanger mankind and future generations. Absolutely no intelligent discussion can ever be had about nuclear energy because the knee-jerk, emotional midgets in the progressive crowd will shout you down. But the dirty little secret is that nuclear energy is incredibly safe and even more cost effective (Ask our socialist hero’s the French). The progressive power brokers know this but they don’t want a discussion on nuclear energy because they know it’s not the same tax-control mechanism as are the other inefficient forms of enviromentally friendly energy. So they mobilize their radical minions to diseminate the “scare-danger” rhetoric about nuclear energy to the ignorant masses and in turn successfully put to death all legitimate talk about using nuclear energy as an alternative.

    So this new cap-and-trade legislation accomplishes the task of raising the cost of using fossil fuels through the roof allowing the progressives to then claim that all of a sudden wind and solar are more cost effective. And they in fact will be but only after the progressives have destroyed the fossil fuel industry with excessive taxation. But the consumer trying to heat his home isn’t going to see anything happen but his energy bills rise. So the uninformed, ignorant in the masses who looks to his political leaders for guidance is only going to be left confused looking at his exhorbitant energy bill while the arrogant politician tells him that wind and solar are in fact lowering his energy costs.

      But what is most outrageous about this new cap-and-trade bill was the way it was rammed through the house by Obama’s thugs in the democratic party. What happened to Barrack “‘Transparency will be my middle name” Obama? The website that this bold-faced liar was suppossed to set up, available for all to view pending legislation is still just another one of the great one’s unfullfilled promises. Even if they did have the site set up, the way Obama’s heavies rammed through the legislation in one day I find it improbable that anyone would have been able to review the 1,201 page bill anyway. Obama is insulting, his empty promises on the campaign trail show just how arrogant and dismissive of the American people this elitist is.

   How arrogant is this man that he thinks it his right to strongarm such important, game-changing legislation through the congress in one day before ANYBODY in congress can even read it to discuss it and also to allow the American public to even have the chance to become aware of it so they can debate it and think about it so they can contact their congressmen to tell them how they want them to vote. That’s how the founding Father’s set it all up to work. But when you’re the grand majestic messiah I guess you set your own rules.

   This was just round one. Round two will be healthcare reform. A step to socialized medicine is not the direction this country should head. Any informed citizen who has heard the horror stories of socialized medicine in other countries knows what in store once America implements a universal program. Anyone who’s not an illegal alien doesn’t want it. Anyone who’s not brainwashed by the progressives who wrap universal healthcare in some kind of psuedo higher form of moral responsibility doesn’t want it. Anyone who’s not brainwashed into assuming guilt for their own suppossed “privledge” doesn’t want it.

    A good sign is that Obama is losing the debate on Capitol Hill. Any time he initiates a road show or starts with the infomercial’s you know he’s feeling the heat. But don’t fear, I fully expect Obama to use his cult-of-personality to brainwash the ignorants into feeling guilt for not wanting to make sure everyone gets free coverage. Get ready for every exaggerated sob-story out there and some that will be fully fabricated, get ready for Obama to exude his fiegned compassion every time he wraps his arm around some poor soul’s shoulder, get ready for Obama to tug at your heart strings and make you feel as if it is your moral obligation to ensure free health care for every American and illegal alien who wanders over the border.

    But, also get ready for longer waits, rationed care, and an older generation that gets put out to pasture by some government burreaucrat who deems certain procrdures to be too cost ineffective. All you ignorants who are brainwashed into wringing your hands that it is everyone’s right to free healthcare better get ready to wring your hands when your elderly self or loved one gets sentenced to death by Obama’s universal health czar who decides that someone younger needs the procedure instead.

   But the biggest exposure of hypocrisy will be when you find out that Obama and all the politicians who voted  for universal healthcare do NOT enroll in the same plans as all you commoners in the masses. See if this vapid, self-absorbed maniac who’ll be out there twisting every question he gets asked on his road show to somehow relate it to a circumstance in his own life, will relate to you by making available to you the same care available to this man of extreme compassion when you get deathly sick.

    But after all that, if you’ve still got any fight left get ready for the greatest travesty when Obama and his punks ram through amnesty legislation. Understand this; when Obama says that all the newly legalized illegal’s will have to take their place in line behind everbody else he is telling his BIGGEST LIE EVER. That rhetoric sounds good, appealing and fair. BUT even if Obama wanted it to be true it could NOT be. When he is talking amnesty for illegals he is only talking about hispanics and in truth they’re the only ones that matter. Other illegals from other demographics do not count because there numbers are infintesimal. Here’s the dirty little secrt our devious president does not tell anyone. Hispanics are defined as an “Historically disadvantaged” minority subject to availability for ALL the affirmative action programs out there. As soon as this illegal alien demographic is legalized, by subject of the affirmative action laws they IMMEDIATELY JUMP to the FRONT of the line. That becomes their legal right. With one feld swoop of a vote the demographics of this country will change FOREVER. And before I get labeled a racsist, understand this all you African-Americans out there, your availability to affirmative action (Which I believe is legitimate and that the African-American is the ONLY demographic that should have the availability to affirmative action) becomes significantly diminished because the sheer numbers of the Hispanics  will increase to an unbelievable degree.

     That is the real danger. Because once these illegals are given amnesty, don’t think they’re going to start filling up all the civil sevice quota’s, no, they’re going to start filling up all the government assistance, government giveaway quota’s. You think they’re a drain on the economy now? Wait untill the taxpayer is picking up the assistance tab for all these new American citizens.

     But the American public keeps their blinders on, lets this charlatan game them with his cult-of-personality and continues to shoulder the guilt heaped upon them by all the moralist finger waggers out there. They keep letting that happen and they’re not even going to know where they’re living.

June 27, 2009 Posted by | blog, culture, entertainment, history, Life, news, people, personal, philosohy, Politics, random, religion, thoughts | Leave a comment

sicilian1: The Problem of Evil

    For the atheist the simple answer is that there can be no God because evil exists and that a perfect God would not create a world where the capacity for evil is allowed. That’s always the atheists “gotcha question.” But by making that generic argument the atheist is only scratching the surface. Which is not at all surprising because although the atheist always seems to think it is themselves to be the deep thinkers refusing to wrap their minds around such “infantile” and “constraining” thoughts as the concept of a “God” and that “ridiculous” thing called “faith”, it is actually the believer (at least a deist) who has examined the subject, wrestled with the evidence, reconciled and clearly constructed the available facts, accepted the truths bitter as they may be to swallow and persevered through it all to live by guiding principles of a God and a faith, who in fact is actually the deeper thinker.

     Is there evil in the world? Yes, absolutely, too much of it in fact. But once again upon further examination evil is in fact further proof of God’s existence. First off, evil lends credence to the spiritual nature of man. All other species kill only for food and survival. Man is the only species that kills indiscriminately and for purely emotional reasons. Only man has the real choice to commit evil acts such as murder. Whether right or wrong, justifiable or not, backed into a corner, man always has a choice to make. Every other species kills or commits “wrong” exclusively on instinct and for their survival. That man has a choice, the ability to reason proves that man has a conscience or spirit. The duality of mind and matter is not present in any other species.

   The conscience, spirit, feedom of choice leads one to the cliche’d concept of free will. Many people consider this to be a “yada-yada” argument and dismiss it without examination. But sorry to inform the atheist, it is fundamental to God’s purpose. This concept answers the question of why a perfect God would allow evil.

   The premise is that of a creator God who  created man. Now whether one believes in the karma of an afterlife or karma in this earthly life there can be no such concept if man does not have the freedom to choose between good or evil. If we as humans had no choice then we would only be robots and the concept of karma could never play a role in our decisions. If God made it so humans only had the option to choose between degree’s of goodness then that would only lead to the logical evolution that the lesser degree’s of goodness would become badness. What reasonable option would it be to only choose from degree’s of goodness. How ridiculous would it sound as humans weighed the options between being ‘really all out good’ or just ‘a little bit’ good. If one didn’t choose the option of extreme goodness than everything else would be evil.

    If humans didn’t have the option to choose then there could be no real good and there could be no real meaning to life. I myself want the option to choose. I myself invite the struggle against the forces of evil because it makes life that much more meaningful. Maybe it never was God’s intention to make this world perfect and that is not proof of His non-existence but in fact stronger proof of His existence. If the atheist want perfection then a good suggestion would be for them to live moral lives because then they can probably experience some form of perfection in this life and if there is an afterlife, in that life too.

   Why does God create evil? because if God created a perfect world that was completely moral and without sin then the concept of free will would be null and void which would not only make the strive for perfection in an afterlife for those who believe in that meaningless but also would make this life completely meaningless. God gives everyone the choice between right or wrongs, good or bad, love or hate, acceptance or rejection. If humans didn’t have those options then they could never really experience all the positives of life. The existence of all the negatives inherant in the world is what makes the positives available. How could one know, love and accept God, anyone or anything if they didn’t have the option to deny them? And that goes for all our interpersonal and societal relationships. When atheists reject God because of their insistence on freedom to do as they please they don’t understand that that freedom was given to them by God through free will.

    The personal pain and suffering of humans is another favorite argument of the atheists to prove God doesn’t exist. But what kind of humans would we be without obstacles to overcome or crisis’ to deal with? God doesn’t want weak and untested people. Our tests of faith are the greatest struggles we will ever encounter. The triumph over obstacles builds character and makes us stronger more principled human beinfs. It is during times of trouble when we discover things about ourselves and ultimately determines who we are. Those that can persevere through times of trouble and still maintain their faith in God or at least humanity have made themselves more principled human beings.

    Life is not meant to be easy. None of us live in a bubble ,everything we do and that that others do causes a chain reaction that impacts all our lives. All the trials and tribulations, both good and bad, activated by those chain reaction set off by each individual action is what makes life life and how we respond determines our ultimate fate.

     Those evil doers though sometimes seemingly getting over with their sins, will ultimately pay some kind of karmic price, whether here on earth, in a life hereafter, or with a legacy of sin and destruction for those they care about to clean up.

   I hate to say it but there is evil and corruption in the world, life is not always fair but that isn’t an excuse to compromise one’s own principles, let their faith in God and their fellow man crumble, or even to deny the bitter truths of life. God allows evil to exist by giving all humans who perpetrate it the free will to do so because it is that free will that allows humans to decide whether or not to live by God’s way ;which is for the good of mankind, so that if they decide to do God’s will they’ll be rewarded in the life hereafter or in this life through peace of mind in knowing they are living righteously. Ultimately the decision is each individual own.

June 26, 2009 Posted by | blog, culture, entertainment, health, history, Life, news, people, personal, philosohy, Politics, random, religion, thoughts | 13 Comments

sicilian1: Iran and the Latest

    Lets be clear; Obama is not in the least bit happy with what is transpiring in Iran. This revolt by the people of Iran against their oppressive theocratic regime is never what Obama expected after his fawning Cairo speech. That Cairo speech was just more pro-Islamic rhetoric to lend more credibility to the Arab/Muslim world and take another slap at the face of the West. That entire self-absorbed speech was framed to make the Arab/Muslim world look like the innocent victims, misunderstood and exploited by the arrogant and callous West who because of their many insensitive transgressions would now have to accept a role of subserviance in payment for centuries of sins.

    The ground was laid to in Cairo for America to bow and beg for forgiveness and concede whatever was deemed neccessary by the noble Arab/Muslim world as reparations for finally earning their respect. Obama was feeling good and preening. Then Iran erupted. What was initially a protest of voter fraud and misconduct, quickly mushroomed into an outright revolt against the fanatical, theocratic, oppressive leaders of Iran.

    Obama’s initial silence was deafening. France’s Sarkozy was the first leader to come out and condemn both the vote fraud and then the violence. Sarkozy spoke for the essential component of democracy that the people’s votes be legitimately counted. Obama finally issued a form statement about the world watching that had absolutely no impact. Then Obama dug himself a hole from which he’ll never be able to crawl out of when on June 16, 2009 on his “house” channel CNBC, the great messiah of infinate compassion, said to the effect, ‘Achmedinejad? Mousavi? Who cares? Either one will be hostile.’ I’ve already posted and blogged extensively about the insensitivity of that comment. There is no defense for that lack of compassion and inability to stand up for democracy. It is an insult and abomination for an American president to dismiss the Iranian people in their fight for democracy.

    Finally the outrage from the images of brutality on the part of the Iranian theocracy compelled the president to change course and say something sympathetic about the revolutionaries in Iran. But Obama’s less than forceful remarks, though a welcome change in words, left so much to be desired as far as impact, passion and identification with the people that  his statement only shined a light on his stubborness to switch course on his Iranian policy and his petulance that he was even forced to do so.

      Face it Mr. president Obama, the Islamic Republic is probably over, the Islamic revolution is dying and following blindly the dictates of religious clerics just because they said Allah said so is not going to play anymore in the home of radical Islam. That is a change that could have dramatic effect in the region. Maybe an embrace of humanity and a refusal to be pushed around and subjugated by religion can finally bring the Middle East out of the Middle Ages.

    But do not expect our president to even slightly nudge things in that direction. Now the popular argument is that Obama doesn’t want America to seem like it’s yet again meddling in the affairs of a soverign Arab/Muslim nation. That if he did so it would only allow the Mullah’s to demonize us and change the issue and that when the dust settled poor, little innocent Iran would have another grievance to hold over America’s head.

    Well, that would be ok if it were relevant. The Mullah’s haven’t stopped the hate/blame America rhetoric for one second. The Friday prayer servicve led by Supreme Guide Khamenei was nothing more than an anti-American rally. And the most incendiary thing Obama said was about Mousavi! So who was Obama so scared of offending.

   Obama’s supporters spew that lame excuse at every turn. It’s illegitimate in the face of Khamenei’s continued  blame/hate America rhetoric and also because the critics have done nothing more than ask the president to show solidarity to the revolutionaries. That’s all any pro-American, pro-democracy type is asking of the leader of the free world.

    Others like to criticize Obama’s naivette, that he didn’t see this coming. Or his inexperience in world affairs leading to a lack of intuition in dealing with these types of crisis’. Some point out a calculation and intellect in analyzing the situation before acting rashly. The excuses are endless. But many, even his staunchest critics miss the point.

   Obama wants Iran to be a power in the region. He wants to use their threats of hegmony and destruction to his advantage. He believes a nuclear Iran would be a good thing. You know why? Because Obama could use all those things to squeeze more concessions out of Israel. Obama is clearly not a friend of Israel. He does not sympathize with them in even the slightest. If Iran is saber-rattling. if they have nukes and threaten to use them then it will be much easier to get the Israeli’s to stop the settlements, give up the “occupied” land and undoubtedly as much land as can be wrung out of them to have the Israeli’s retreat even further to the coastline. A nuclear Iran, an unfriendly Iran, an unreasonable Iran can be used to cripple Israel in the region. Obama can try to negotiate Iran into “backing” down as long as Israel concedes further to their Arab/Muslim nieghbors. Everybody knows the Muslim extremist can never be held to any agreements. History has proven that they break them as soon as they make them.

    But what will Obama care. He’ll be hailed as a hero for bringing “peace” (Temporary as it may be) but he’ll have achieved his larger goals which is to weaken Israel and give more power to the Arab/Muslim world. Everybody thinks he’s on the level and become perplexed when he makes these seemingly stupid statements or takes these same seemingly stupid positions. But they do not understand that Obama is on point in doing the bidding of the progressive power brokers who run him.

    These progressives have no real compassion. All their policies are drapped in rhetoric about being for the greater good of mankind. They like to wag a finger of moral superiority at everybody and try to make them feel guilty for every thought and action, past and present. They like to make everybody feel responsible for shouldering the blame of every past transgression whether they participated in them or not and most times those being saddled with the baggage of guilt weren’t even born and never even benifited. It also doesn’t matter how venial the suppossed sin. Those identified as belonging to the group of evil does are suppossed to be like Marlon Brando in ‘Apocalypse Now’, screaming “Oh the Horror” over the very being of their exsistence. We are all to look to the Obama types so they can scold us into right thought, words action, employment and whatever other moral dictate they can impose.

    But these Obama progressive types always expose themselves. When the Iranian people needed compassion and support, first the “one” ,who suppossedly is driven only by a higher degree of morality, one us mere humans could never come close to emulating, was silent then insulting and finally only forced to give the coldest of remarks. The petulance Obama exuded at that press conference spoke volumes over how upset he was over the events in Iran.

    The progressive crowd has no real use for people except to use them as “lab rats” in examination of whether their acedemic theories work. They do not care how many lives or generations they ruin. It’s all for the greater good of discovering what does in fact work. And if some human lives get trampled along the way that’s ok by them because it’s all for the betterment of their causes which they feel are the only “right” causes. The people that suffer should do so happily because they were in the “service” of the progressive who felt he was improving the lot of mankind.

   The progressives are so arrogant. They sit in their ivy-towers theorizing the writing position papers that are then implemented by their willing political foot-soldiers then promoted by their lap dogs in the media. It doesn’t matter how many times Marxism has failed and how many lives it has ruined. They just re-package it under a new name and believe it will work because “they” are the ones trying it and “they” know how to do it.

    Where was our progressive president when the Iranians needed him? Where was he when the poor girl, Neda needed him to call out her name? These people are a nuisance to our president because they’re getting in the way of his larger goals. How’s he suppossed to “chop” the American way down to size when Iranians are dying for the freedoms we are all so lucky to be born with and take for granted from our very first breath. The Iranian uprising does not fit into Obama’s America is evil, Islam is love narrative.

     I do not call for the president to attack Iran or send in troops. But why can’t he stand for the freedom-fighting Iranian people AND mean it?!!

      The most important question in Tuesday’s press conference came from Chuck Todd. Beyond the question which was very relevant, the fact that it came from Todd is very telling. Todd works for NBC. Obviously he gets his be an Obama “rump-swab” marching orders everyday. But on Tuesday, Todd decided to show his journalistic integrity. He asked Obama if he was going to outline the , “consequnces” for Iran. Of course Obama ducked and dodged and did his usual double talk. But Todd persisted and, as whenever anybody does persist in getting an answer to a tough question, Obama’s punkishness shines through. In the end Obama didn’t really answer.

    But it is a legitimate question. What consequences must the Iranian regime face from the international community for this abomination. And just for the record, getting dis-invited to the 4th of July parties doesn’t rate. The consequences must be tougher. And they can’t be these faux-sanctions that get waived so GE and every other corporation can rake in billions. There has to be REAL INTERNATIONAL consequences for the actions of the Iranian theocracy.

     Say once the dust settles, and Obama can wipe his brow because the Iranian Republic still stands, what happens next. Does Obama lend credibility to the regime by meeting at the negotiating table, bowing to the Supreme Guide and shaking the blood soaked hand of Achmedinejad? Is that how it all ends?

June 24, 2009 Posted by | blog, culture, history, Life, news, people, personal, philosohy, Politics, random, religion, thoughts | 1 Comment

sicilian1: Iran and Obama’s Reaction.

     “The difference between Achmadinejad and Mousavi in terms of their actual policies may not be as great as has been advertised……Either way we are going to be dealing with an Iranian regime that has historically been hostile to the United States.” Said president Obama to CNBC this past Tuesday.

     This may in fact be true. Mousavi was after all a loyalist of Ayatollah Khomenei, the leader of the 1979 Iranian revolution, and involved in that regime. It is also true that even if Mousavi “won” the sham election he would still have to take his marching orders from “Supreme Leader” Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

      But if Obama isn’t going to say anything positive on behalf of the protesters then he should NOT say anything at all. Sometimes the things our president says just boggles my mind. Does that statement show his ignorance? Arrogance? True feelings? Lack of ability to truly grasp the situation? Inexperience?Lack of interest?

    Taken on it’s face the statement is highly insulting. Even if true, many Iranian citizens who are protesting and revolting and facing beatings and in some cases dying in expression of what they consider to be an outrage being perpetrated upon them by their corrupt mullah’s do NOT hold the same opinion of our dear president Obama.

     What started out as a vote counting protest has metastisized in the matter of a few days into a revolt against the theocratic Iranian regime. The mullah’s have about as much respect for the intelligence of their people as does president Obama. They go through a “dog-and-pony” show of picking candidates, having them campaign and then holding an election. But the mullah’s are so bored with this exercise that they can’t even carry this big “show” to completion. No more than three hours after millions of votes are cast the mullah’s announce the winner as Achmedinejad, there little “house candidate. The arrogance and indignance of these mullah’s is what in fact ignited the initial protests. If they would have just played it straight by pretending for a reasonable time to count the votes then maybe the Iranian people would have bought their scam of a democratic election.

     So to quell the protests the mullah’s even more quickly announce that a recount is completed and that Achmedinejad remained the winner. It is at that point where the protests became an outright revolt of the theocratic “Supreme Leader.” Islam has always thrived on keeping it’s adhearants ignorant. The Muslims are just suppossed to blindly follow every word out of the “Supreme Leader’s” mouth just as they are suppossed to do the same with every word Mohammed said. I know all you apologists out there are going to scream, ‘what about the Pope.’ Please this is 2009, the Pope don’t got it like that anymore. That worked back in the medieval times but now people are educated and think for themselves. And that’s the mullah’s problem in Iran. They have an educated population that is NO longer going to deny themselves the freedoms due them as human beings.

     But you have Obama dismissing the protesters with his “wave of the hand” quote from above. How arrogant can this man be? While his quote may in fact be factually true, the Iranian people do NOT think so. They are willing to take to the streets to make the change. Yet Obama shows the same disregard for the Iranian people as the mullah’s. I thought Obama cared so much about humanity. I thought common human compassion shaped every decision. He has draped his nomination for any Supreme Court Justice as needing to possess the attribute of interpretting the Constitution with compassion for the people affected by the decisions of the court. But he could care the least for the people of Iran.

     Obama is like all those in the privledged, progressive, elitist crowd who only fiegn compassion in order to frame all their social engineering as some kind of act of altruism. They really have no true compassion. To them people are just a means to and end to shape the world as they deem fit. That quote proves who Obama reaaly is. The People of Iran are fighting for the right for their votes to count, their voices to be heard and their will as citizens of their country to be done. It doesn’t matter how more or less hostile Achmedinejad or Mousavi is to the United States. What matters is that the Iranians do NOT want who the mullah’s have forced upon them as their president. The right to be respected as a citizentry, the right to define who represents them in government is what this is about. Can NOT our great president with his fine intellect understand that?

     Obama does NOT have to go to war with Iran. He does NOT have to denigrate the mullah’s. He only has to give the Iranian people a voice in support of their fight. Or at least say nothing. NOT throw them under the bus the way he has. He might as well tell them to give up because it doesn’t matter what they want because the United States isn’t going to view any Iranian president as anything but hostile. He might as well have said, “Achmedinejad? Mousavi? What’s the difference? So you Iranians should just stop wasting your time and take whatever the mullah’s are going to shove down your throat.”

     Does Obnama NOT see the opportunity at hand? If the Iranian people are successful in their revolt this could change the world like nothing in our times. (For the better I might add). Is he aware of the shift in mentality? The Iranians are now revolting against theocracy NOT a bad vote count. Iran the home and financier of much of radical Islam throughout the world, a regime of thugs who terrorize their people and incessantly saber-rattle on the world stage to intimidate and earn concessions is ERUPTING from within. Just because the Iranians have been brainwashed and intimidated into believing that the “Supreme Leader” is the voice of Allah does NOT mean they are going to buy that lie anymore and especially NOT when they are being denied the basic  and free rights of human’s throughout the world and when they are being undermined as a nation in the eyes of the world.

    If the Iranians are successful in toppling this theocracy and this false “Supreme Leader” then radical Islam may suffer a fatal blow. If the Iranians can show the world that Muslims will NO longer stand for oppression nor the fanatical leadership of mullah’s/imam’s/”Supreme Leaders” and the like then the face of the Muslim/Middle Eastern world may change forever and finally take a step towards respect and legitimacy and hopefully embrace modernity. No matter how long a religion seeks to oppress it’s followers, eventually the people will follow their natural desire to express the freedom endowed to them by their creator. People want to be able to make their own honest decisions. People are INHERRENTLY good and want good things for themselves and their fellow men and that is why evil can NEVER win in the end.

     The native religion of Iran/Persia is Zoroastrianism which did in fact influence Judaism when they came in contact with one another under Persian rule. Zoroaster (The founder) taught that there was an epic struggle between the forces of good and the forces of evil but that in the end good would win becasuse the creator God Ahura Mazda had the perfect balance of wisdom, knowledge and perception to tip the fight in his favor. The Iranians would do good to take the lesson from their native faith, Zoroastianism, because if they stay strong and fight the fight to the end their desire for what is good for them will be rewarded and the evil theocracy of the mullah’s will be defeated.

     But don’t count on the support of the leader of the free world. Beyond his obvious sympathies for anything Islam and anything in Islam that supports his HATE America beliefs, Obama is a Chicago/Acorn thug. Is it any surprise he would identify with the vote-rigging and election corruption of the Achmedinejad crowd by nature anyways?

    Those words that Obama throws around like, “debate”, “dialouge”, “engagement” are nauseating. That stuff works in the dorm rooms of the Ivy-league universities where theories always work just like they’re drawn up on paper. In the REAL world people need REAL things that work for them. If Obama doesn’t want to rock-the-boat for hope of “negotiating” with Achmedinejad and the mullah’s running him, then what better opportunity to use as leverage against these thugs to set some conditions? Oh ya, I forgot, Obama doesn’t want conditions on any country we negotiate with. He wants to come hat-in-hand apologizing ad-nauseum for America’s long list of Obama assigned transgressions. After Obama bow’s and fawn’s, especially to any Muslim leader, then he will start asking how much they want him to give up to them.

    It’s pretty pathetic when the world has to look to French president Sarkozy as the voice of the West when speaking out against the Iranian abomination.

    If Obam’s not going to support the Iranian revolt then he should say nothing. If he feels the need to speak it should be the original tempered remarks. But do NOT throw the Iranians under the bus by dismissing their revolt with a wave of his arrogant, elitist hand.

June 20, 2009 Posted by | blog, culture, history, Life, news, people, personal, philosohy, Politics, random, religion, thoughts | Leave a comment

sicilian1: Hey “Whitey”, Where were you when O.J. got off.

    There’s many white people out there who FIEGN compassion, love, understanding, sympathy, etc., for the black man. These are ussually your ivory-towered, lilly-white, do-gooding liberals who think they’re earning their badge of courage in racial tolerance by FIEGNING that concern. It allows them to “look down” on all the racial insensitive ignorants out there as they pat themselves on the back and congratulate all those in their hypocritical, dishonest “tea-and-crumpets” crowd. They sit around the country club where the only “black” people are the help and think they’re doing their part in the cause of racial equality by “tipping-good.”

   If you REALLY want to know how down they are with the cause, don’t ask their opinion on Beyonce’s beauty or their favorite athlete. Ask these hypocrites where they were when O.J. got off and ask them truthfully how they felt. You don’t even have to wait for their pandering answer because the moment they hesitate and you see the fear accross their face is ALL the answer you’ll ever need.

   Because if THEY were truthful, they’ll tell you how they wrung their hands in outrage and called their friends to discuss the “injustice” that was just perpetrated. The more devious “white-guilters” will disguise their outrage as an outrage over the violence to a woman and mother. But they can’t fool me because they were really mad because of their inherrant racsism and predjudices.

    On that day I had gone over my friends house early in the morning to wake him up because we had some “rounds” to make that day. Our relationship had started out as a business relationship but eventually we realized we had much in common and started to hang out together. It had NOTHING to do with ANYTHING racial. Niether of us could be labeled “sell-outs”. We just had a common outlook, the same interests and most of all the same sense of humor regarding the hypocracy of most people. We became good friends. During our “heyday” we were clubbing four nights a week and hitting the strip clubs in between. The party didn’t start untill we arrived because we were buying the bar. We had our pick of eye-candy, no matter the race, but as someone said, “we only give our number to selected few.”

     Eventually we had a falling out over business but after our fed bids and now that we are civilians we put that behind us and hang out like regular people. Our bond is deep and has NOTHING to do with race. We are two people who experienced life together and we know without speaking the words that we would probably die for each other. Even when we were not on speaking terms if he needed me and called upon me I would have dropped everything no matter the percieved beefs I held to be by his side. And to tell you the truth, I would’ve probably been happy for the opportunity to show him my commitment. When we did finally come together we didn’t even mention why we were mad at each other and in fact have never discussed why we were mad at each other. Our bond was and is too deep and we finally realized, I guess, that is what matters. And that is REAL.

    Anyways, the day O.J. was aquitted I started off over my friends house early in the morning. He always took alot of time to get ready. He had to make sure he was lined up, had the right clothes and just the right amount of cologne. I actually thought it was ridiculous and sometimes would get irritated, especially when it had to do with money. When that was the case I’d be up in my pajama’s with my hair disheveled ready to shake someone down for what was mine. He on the other hand had to put himself together before he’d do ANYTHING.

      So I was sitting around his house watching Tv waiting for him to get ready. To the best of my recollection the verdict came in sometime just after noon east coast time. (Give or take an hour here or there). We watched it together and my friend expressed his uncontained joy. He didn’t care if O.J. did or didn’t do it, he was just happy that O.J. got off. I guess that I could sum up his attitude as one of satisfaction that finally a black man played the system and won. Me, my attitude was one of apathy as far as the racial issue. As a criminal at the time I ABSOLUTELY identified with the accussed and my feeling was one of,  ‘hey the jury has spoken, more power to the juice.’

      After the verdict my friend quickened his pace as he hurried with enthusiasm to get over his cousins house. Once there, we walked into almost a “party” atmosphere. His cousin had many family members and they were all up and excited over the just announced verdict. Never did any one of them rail against the “white” man. Their happiness was just over the fact that a fellow brother didn’t get strung up by the system.

   We finally made our way out of my friends cousin’s house and got to making our ’rounds’. Late that afternoon, as we had to get ready for our routine night of clubbing, we hit the local Mall to buy our outfits. Throughout the day my friend and his cousin had been unapologetically shouting out ‘the juice is loose. ‘ They were doing just that when, while in a department store browsing for something relevant to wear that night, a store clerk came up to us to ask if we needed any help. He was your average white-boy. We joked and bantered with him for several minuets when my friends cousin added weight to the mood by asking the white-boy what he thought about O.J.

      The happy-go-lucky attitude of the white-boy changed as he went silent as my friend and his cousin fixed a silent gaze upon him. The white-boy was nervous, he had absolutely no idea what he should say. His face said it all as he searched for the “right” answer so as not to “offend”. Finally my friends cousin let him off the hook by breaking the silence and saying, “It’s alright you can say what you want.” He then pointed to me and said, “He’s my friend and he’s white and he thinks O.J. did it and that’s ok.” At that I fixed my most intimidating “guido” stare on him. The white-boy looked at me, his eyes said, ‘please “whitey” help me out. Don’t let these blacks hurt me.’ But I wasn’t going to help him out. If he had something to say then he was going to have to say it or stick his tail between his legs and say whatever he thought he had to say.

       There was a deafening silence, the white-boy swallowed hard, he was waiting for someone anyone to throw him a life jacket, his eyes registered all the bone-chilling fear he felt, he obviously didn’t feel he was on friendly territory nor no matter my cousins friends insistence that it was okay for him to express his true opinion and pointing to me as evidence that nothing would be held against him was enough to relieve the white-boy of his fears. The longer he held his tongue the more we toyed with him with our intimidating stares. Finally the white-boy stuttered and stammered and gave some kind of incohearent, nonsensical answer.

      But what his silence and stuttering proved was the ingrained racsist attitude inside him. He was caught off guard. He hadn’t had time to form a politically correct or unoffensive answer. If he wasn’t a racsist he would have come out with his honest opinion no matter who it would have offended. He wouldn’t have had the fear of offending anybody because he would have felt safe that his answer was based on an intelligent analysis of the facts and not stoked by any underlying racial predjuidices.

      My friend himself personally thought O.J. did it. I never heard any of the other black people in my life give an opinion whether O.J. really did it or not. They didn’t care. Their attitude was that they identified with his stuggle to fight the system and win.

     He NEVER accussed me of being a racsist because I felt O.J. “got away with murder.” That’s because he knew my opinion wasn’t based on any hidden racsist feelings. I myself wish I had a lawyer that could’ve played the legal system a little more like Johnny Cochran. Do I hold anything against O.J.’s legal team? No, I respect them immensely because they took their oath to defend their client to the extreme. They played every card available to them to get their client a walk and they were successful. If there were more lawyers who were like that and not the sell-outs they are there’d be alot less people in jail. Do they deserve all the fame and fortune they’ve recieved because of what they did? You bet they do.

    Do I feel bad for the loss of life, especially for that Goldman kid who was just an innocent bystander? Absolutely, it was a tradgedy. But did it have anything to do with race? The black man taking out his aggression on a white woman, blah, blah, blah or whatever? No it didn’t. It was personal resentment, anger, jealousy between A MAN and A WOMAN. That’s it. I personally feel that O.J. was frustrated and upset beyond emotions that he was subsidizing this woman’s existence and watching her in turn subsidize a succession of boy-toy’s and engage in other slutty behavior on his dime. And he just flipped out.

    Now as far as the other case, O.J. did something and was guilty of something. But is he paying because he got away with murder the first time around? You bet. They gave him all that time for trying to “steal” his stuff. They really stuck it to him. But sadly this is how the criminal justice system works. If O.J. lived with the first verdict he unfortunately now must live with the second. And either which way is not right or wrong but it is what is.

     The point of this whole opinion is if black people REALLY want to find out how “down” a particular “whitey” is with the cause of the black man then all they have to do is ask them the two-fold question, “Where were you at the time of the first O.J. verdict  and what are your true feelings about the first verdict.”

     Now remember, this is the key. Their answer is NOT what’s important, what is important is how quick and confident no matter the conclusion is their answer. If they pause, stammer, stutter, hedge, qualify or otherwise delay their answer, if they play both sides of the fence with their answer then they are absolute, dishonest hypocrites. There is no right or wrong answer as to your belief of guilt or innosense. The racsist will obviously give a quick answer also. But the exercise is to catch the fakers in the “white-guilt” crowd because they’re the ones who will use the delaying tactics to hedge or search for the pandering and patronizing answer.

 

P.S. check out brotharealtalk  blog on wordpress. He had a hand in inspiring this blog. His blog has some very thoughtful insights

June 19, 2009 Posted by | blog, culture, history, Life, news, people, personal, philosohy, Politics, random, thoughts | 6 Comments

sicilian1: Hey “Whitey”!! No Kidding, Halle Berry’s Beautiful.

    I hate racsism of all types whether it’s neo-nazi, KKK, whie supremiscist or black power hate “whitey” types, anti-Semites, Muslim fanatics, Christian Bible thumpers, etc., etc., etc. But the group for which I have ABSOLUTELY no use  is the “white-guilt” crowd. Their disengenuiness is beyond nauseating.

    You know the type, they sit there patting themselves on the back while they tell all their other uppity friends how beautiful they think Halle Berry is or what a great actor “that” Denzel Washington is. They think just by making those obvious statements that it absolves them of all there instinctual racsist feelings. It’s as if they searching for “Brownie points” on the way to Heavan. As if when they die and get to Heavan to meet their maker and He goes down the litany of their racial and xenophobic transgressions, they’ll just say, “well I tought Halle Berry was beautiful and that Denzel Washington was a great actor” and that will make everything ok.

    They think when they make those two statements that everyone in their crowd believes they’re really not a racsist. Then all the other “lily” white uppities nod in agreement and everybody feels so “good” about themselves that they can skip their dose of Prozac for the day. Just saying it then agreeing with it is only a self-congratulatory gesture so they can point to a moral superiority.

   Ya right, see if their son came home with the actual Halle Berry and see how hard they’d be trying to convince all their friends that she was an Italian. See if there daughter came home with the real Denzel Washington and see how fast they’d straight out slit their wrists.

     These people make me sick. They’re ussually privledged white people who have gone to exclusive schools and lived in gated communities. They’ve lived that stereotypical “corny” white exsistence. They wouldn’t “know what time it was” if you told them. They’re the type that gasp when they hear “curses”, cross the street to avoid blacks and lock their car doors in bad nieghborhoods. They’re the type who jump at the sound “boo”, stifle their kids so much that they turn them into drug addicts, can’t get through life without an assortment of psych-tropic drugs and are ussually allergic to dogs. Y’know the type that won’t go swimming untill their food fully digests, think a good time is hitting the karaoke bar and wouldn’t use a public restroom if you paid them.

     The only black person they know is the “guy” at work who’s SOOOO funny. They could really care the least about black people. You couldn’t bribe them with anything to invite that black guy at work to a social function. These types want to avoid any and all interaction with blacks except to talk about how sorry they feel for black people and cry the woe-be-me song about how ashamed they are for all they’ve been given.

     They ussually impart these feelings in their liberal minded daughters who think they themselves are getting “brownie points” to Heavan by volunteering their time to some inner city cause. Oh, how good it makes these white-girls feel when they go back to college and tell all their sorority sisters how enriching it was to help out in the “ghetto”. But let one of these black guys respond to the over friendliness of the white girl and she’ll cry “rape” in a heart beat. Or the other one is the “liberal” white girl who catches a little “jungle-fever” while volunteering in the “ghetto” over the summer and her freinds or family find out about the “liason”, oh man, you bet your life that white girl’s crying “rape”

     The “white-guilt” crowd wants nothing to do with black people on a personal level. NOTHING, they can’t fool me. They only want to get on their soap-box and pontificate about how guilty they feel for their “whiteness”, how their “whiteness” will always be a cross of shame, how at every turn they want to admit the unfairness of their “white” privledge. They want to make everyone believe that this is an injustice they will spend their life in sevice of correcting. They think best way to assuage that guilt is to apologize ad-nauseum. If only they accept responsibility for the sins of their “whiteness” and all the evil “whiteness” in general has done to the “People of Color” then the world will be a better place.

      In reality these “white-guilters” have nothing more than a guilty conscience because they know in their heart-of-hearts that no matter how beautiful Halle Berry is or what a great actor Denzel Washington is, they would NEVER is a zillion years want that blackness “polutting” their “lily” white family tree. They think by accepting guilt and outwardly assigning guilt to everyone else absolves them of how they really feel.

     These “white-guilters” are the biggest hypocrites in the world and the next time their patronizing you real black people by acknowledging the sins of the white man then adding their little comments about Halle Berry’s beauty and Denzel Washington’s acting ability, stop these hypocrites in there tracks by asking them if they want those two black people to marry their kids. See how they stutter on that question.

June 18, 2009 Posted by | blog, culture, entertainment, history, Life, news, people, personal, philosohy, random, thoughts | 4 Comments

sicilian1: The situation in Iran

    The unrest in Iran has put the Obama White House in a very interesting position. There has been wailing from the “Right” for Obama to come out and denounce what’s going on in Iran. But the statements from the White House have been tempered at best.

     Some would expect me to jump on that critical “band-wagon” and slam Obama for not coming out strongly in the defense of democracy in Iran. But I understand the situation Obama is in as the “Leader of the free world” and from a personal view.

    There is much anti-American sentiment in the Arab/Muslim world. Many people HATE America for real and imagined sins. We all know what they are and there’s no need to re-hash them. Achmedinejad is also very good at working his base and all the fanatics up into a fervent Hate-America frenzy. If Obama comes out and denounces Iran right now this could be all the fodder Achmedinejad needs to take everyones eye off the ball and turn this into a debate about America “meddling” in the affairs of other countries. Oh and wouldn’t all the Hate-America types here at home love to run with that “meddling” line.

   Obama also has to be careful about our troops who are fighting wars in Iraqu and Afgahnastan. If an increased wave of anti-American sentiment takes hold alot of US military loves could be lost as these terrorist organizations ratchet things up.

    Believe me, Achmedinejad will take anything he can manipulate out of the White House as an excuse to inflame his base. It will no longer be about the electoral misconduct but about America and Arab/Muslim soveriegnty.

    But don’t think I’m absolving Obama. Say what you want about the extemity of my distrust for our president, even his supporters will, though maybe begrudgingly, admit that in respects to foriegn policy Obama is the most ant-American president we have ever elected. Don’t think for a second I believe Obama’s not on the side of the Mullah’s. It is clear that Obama errs on the side of socialism or marxism or at least anything NOT fully democratic. Obama is a Muslim sympathizer. In regards to Arab/Muslim beefs, as false and distorted as they may be, Obama views everything through that Arab/Muslim prism of Western resentment. Obama is “down” with all their rhetoric. The West is wrong about everything they have ever done in the Arab?Muslim worls and to Obama, they are the victims. And Obama is by far NOT alone in this sentiment here in America. He is just the face of it at this time.

    If Obama could come out and endorse Achmedinejad and the Mullah’s he would. In his mind he would wrap whatever they’re doing into some kind of justification for past transgressions. Y’know, the usual “finger-wagging”. Because Obama is most at home when he’s pontificating and presenting his views in some kind of morally superior rhetoric.

    The problem with Obama’s natural inclination to side with everything Islam and outright sell-out America is that there are too many Americans out there who still believe in America. They’re stupid enough to still believe in “mom-and’apple pie” and that everything is “pure” and on the level and that any politician reall cares about them. Obama can’t just ‘cold-turkey” remove the guise of caring about the interests of America because if he does he REALLY loses all those gullibles. He would also lose many politicians in his own wing because they aren’t going to just stand there like morons while Obama makes his real intentions known and possibly kill their own political careers.

      So Obama has to keep his comments about the turmoil in Iran balanced and low key. He can not say what he really wants, which is sell-out language, and he can not say what most fervent patriots want and outright denounce the actions og Achmedinejad and the Mullah’s because if he does either he’s in deep trouble with some one. So he just keeps his mouth shut and plays it close to the vest.

   This all really works out good for those who are on the side of America and democracy. You see, Obama’s intentions to re-shape America need to be done with subtlety so nobody realizes what’s even going on. So all these speeches where he cuts America down to size have the effects of “brainwashing” by osmosis. So Obama criticizes Iran gently as he bides his time undercut America. In the meantime the unrest continues to ensue in Iran as those lovers of freedom fight to change things for the better. Sad as it may be lives are alwayslost in the fight for democracy as dictators do NOT give up power easily. But the people can only be kept ignorant for so long.

You see back during the Iranian revolution (1979) the a Mullah’s encouraged Iranians to have more babies in order to grow the population. Obviously their intentions were to have a bigger base in order to spread their form of radical Islam. Unfortunately for the Mullah’s what they created was a young, vibrant and educated class of people who are waking up to the reality of the oppression in Iran.

    Islam thrives on ignorance. Keeping the populus illiterate allows the Mullah’s to disseminate any lies or idea’s they want. They like having suicide-bombers who kill in the name of Allah who can’t even read a word out of the Koran. But by educating the ypung population instaed of having an educated class to do the bidding of the Mullah’s they instead created an educated class who is waking up.

      Any empowered people want democracy. And Iran IS the cradle of civilization. The Iranian people are some of the most ancient peoples. There Persian Empire which ruled the known world for a period back in ancient times is acknowledged as one of the greatest civilizations in all of humanity. Cyrus the Great is even reverred by the Jews for his genorosity and charity amongst other things.  These ancient peoples were NOT Arabs and did NOT practice Islam. In fact the ancient religion of the Iranians, Zoroastrianism, is arguably the most influential Western religion of all time. It is also one of the oldest religions in the world. The Iranians who migrated East are credited with laying the grounwork that eventually became the Hindu faith. These are a great, proud and influential people.

    It is a shame that such a great people allowed their great culture which gave so much to the world to be destroyed and perverted by the lie that is Islam. From a religion that was so humble, respectful and accepting to now where Iran is the home of radical Islam.

     Hopefully something great is once again happening in Iran to wipe out the hate and bring in a new age of peace.

June 17, 2009 Posted by | blog, culture, history, Life, news, people, personal, philosohy, Politics, random, religion, thoughts | Leave a comment

sicilian1: Hey, People of Color, Do you even know what you mean?

    There’s been something that’s been sticking in my “craw” for a long time. It was something FOX news pundit Juan Williams said immediately after Obama gave his first “State of the Union” address and before Bobby Jindal gave the Republican rebutall.

     Breathlessly (As it must always be with this statement) Juan Williams said something to the effect:

                               “What a great night for America when two PEOPLE OF COLOR represent their respective parties”

    I have no quarrell with judging the night to be a “great”  night in consideration of the background of the two men. I also have ABSOLUTELY no quarrell with Juan Williams who I find to be an extremely fair and thoughtful commentator and have felt that way since I became aware of him all the way back to when he was on CNN and hosting “Crossfire”.

    My problem is with the “People of Color” statement. I have a problem with that statement no matter who utters it AND especially when white people utter it in “defense” of “People of Color”. I really want to know what is meant by those who utter the statement, what are they trying to imply, to whom are they addressing the statement, what people do they REALLY mean to include in that label, are they reaching their intended audience, do they care how that statement is percieved, do they care which people identify with that statement, do they care which people feel themselves to be included in that statement, do they care if or intend to cause confusion with that statement, do they have a secret agenda, do they even know what they REALLY mean by the statement?

    I do not feel that many people who use that term have any ulterior motives. It’s just a term that has become so common that I feel most just use it as a throwaway term without any idea the significance of what the term means or implies.

DISCLAIMER !!!!!!!!!!!!!!:

    Obviously as my tag-line implies I am a caucasian of European (Sicilian) ancestry. My wife is a Black-American woman. She is not from the suburbs. She is not a woman trying to run away from her Black identity by marrying a white-guy to become an “uppity” black. If that’s what she wanted then I was the wrong guy for her because my background is your stereotypical Italian background, not some “Lilly white”, sheltered background. That does NOT mean I came from the “Ghetto”, it only means that I was NOT raised with “blinders” on, I did NOT have some kind of “watered-down” upbringing, I saw alot of REAL things and I knew what was expected from me with my heritage. Me and my wife have been together for many years and have several children together. That obviously would make our kids mulatto’s.

    I say all this because I DO NOT want anybody to accuse me of being a racsist. What I’m about to say has validity and I’m coming from a unique perspective. Me and my wife did NOT meet on a college campus where we  think  we’re some kind of “enlightened” thinkers who are the “smartest” people in the room. What I’m talking is REAL people talk. Black people are a part of my family, they are my children so I obviously do NOT want to “KEEP the black man down.”

    Many will not like what I’m going to say. If you have criticism keep it intelligent. Statements that are accusatory or out right rude will not be taken seriously.

Back to the topic.

      In all the years I’ve known my wife and her family and friends some of whom are my own personal friends whom I’ve had close relationships with, I have NEVER once heard any of them refer to themselves as “People of Color”. During my federal prison sentence I was obviously around alot of black guys and I NEVER once heard any of them refer to themselves as “People of Color”. I have asked my wife, some in her family, my friends and many black guys in prison if they consider themselves to be “People of Color” and NOT ONE has ever answered in the affirmative. 99% have always said they consider themselves black.

    Lets analyze the “People of Color” term and try to figure out  what is exactly meant by that. Taken strictly literally the phrase  presents all kinds of problens. Who exactly is a “Person of Color”? Well, my dad is 100% Sicilian, he has the stereotypical Italian features, I can not count the times people have told me, “How Italian looking your dad is”. Now, my dad himself is completely unaware of the impression his appearance makes on other people. My dad doesn’t know “how Italian looking he is”, he is just a person trying to live a life.

      However there is no mistaken that my dad is a VERY “dark” Italian, it is easy to see that he is darker than many people who label themselves “People of Color”. In the summer after a good tan, fugghedaboudit!!! Does my dad’s skin color make him a “Person of Color”? Because taken literally my dad is unquestionably a “Person of Color”. The brown shade of his skin won’t let anyone draw any other conclusion.

     But here’s where we get into the controversy! I’m going to take off my “Mickey-the-Dunce” cap now. We all REALLY know what the term “People of Color” is meant by those who spew it. They mean mainly anyone “Black” or Hispanic and also when the climate favors them anybody else who is NOT “WHITE”.

    So the fact that my dad has European ancestry no matter how “Dark” he is means the “People of Color” crowd don’t want him in their fraternity. OK, that’s fine, my dad’s skin tones can’t erase his European heritage therefore he is not allowed admitance into the “People of Color” club. I’m completely fine with that. BUT if the “People with Color” won’t let my dad in then they can’t have Bobby Jindal either.

     See, what I have just done is establish that “People of Color” is NOT meant to be taken literally because if it was then my brown-skinned Sicilian-American dad would have to be accepted as part of the “People of Color” crowd. But ask anyone that is fond of throwing around the “People of Color” phrase and I guarantee they will ADAMANTLY refuse to include my dad in their “club” because of his European ancestry which technically classifies him as a Caucasian.

    So now that we’ve eliminated the literal meaning of “People of Color” lets talk about the racial meanings. If you mean “People of Color” to mean races that are NOT “White” (I must put  “WHITE”  in quotations because as you can see people that are “white” (caucasian) can most definitely be people with brown-skin (Color)) then you can NOT include Bobby Jindal in your “People of Color” crowd.

     Boby Jindal is an Indian (Hindu) and you can ask any anthropologist/geneticist and they will tell you that the ancestors of Bobby Jindal are classified as Indo-Europeans. These people include ALL Europeans, Slavs, Scandanavians, Saxons, Nords, Gauls, Meditteraneans, Germanics, Gaelics, Persians and Indians. That’s right Persian (Iranians) did NOT have a Semetic progenitor. Likewise the progenitor of the Indian peoples was common with that of the European peoples. The Persians and Indians then mixed with people from the Semetic races which probably accounts for what the “People of Color” crowd would claim to be the Persians and Indians “Color”. So if the Semetic blood mixed with the Caucasian blood is what makes Bobby Jindal a “Person of Color”  to the “People of Color” crowd then that means that crowd would have to include ALL Semites. That’s right “People of Color”, Jews too! Now I can understand their argument for NOT including those of the Mongoloid race, dishonest as it may be considering genetically/anthropologically  speaking this race is related to the (Fiegned horror) the Negriod race, but if you want Bobby Jindal, and your basing the “Color” argument on the mix of Semetic blood because your obviously not basing it on the mix of Indo-European (Caucasian) blood because then you would have to include “brown-skinned” Caucasians (which (Fiegned horror) could NEVER account for the “Color”) then as was said you must include ALL semites because now we’re talking race and NOT “Color”.

NOTE: I’m only conceding this supposition that it must be the Semetic ‘Blood” causing the “Color” because in the dishonest minds of the “People of Color” crowd the Causion “Blood” could never account for it. Truth be told it may in fact be the Caucasion “blood” causing the “Color” because the dominant Caucasion “Type” is NOT the blond-haired, blue-eyed, fair-skinned steroetype but rather the darker-haired, darker-skinned Meditteranean “Look”. The evidence suggest that the Semetic mixture in the Indians bloodlines may not even be that strong. Repeated genetic studies have established the Indian peoples closets similarities are with those of Western Eupropeans (Caucasians). There is also some studies that suggest some similarities between Indians and East Asians.

    This begs the question who is responsible for Bobby Jindal’s “Color”? Since it is indisputable that Indians share genetic similarities with Europeans, are part of the Indo-European genetic classification and most likely came from a Caucasion progenitor, could it be (Fiegned outrage: Oh, the horror) his “Color” comes somewhere from his Caucasion “blood”.

   Because the genetic truth (Look it up “People of Color” crowd) is that the Caucasion race is the MOST  variable in terms of skin color. I feel ABSOLUELY comfortable in saying that skin-color is as much determined by CLIMATE as it is by the inherited melanin is ones genes.

     Remember, I took off my “Mickey-the-Dunce” cap. We know those who spew the “People of Color” nonsense are really talking about “Blacks” and Hispanics. But they try to mask what they REALLY mean in some kind of superior intellectual, humane, moral, justifiable and equitable consciousness.It’s nothing more than an unspoken threat to anyone who may point out their hypocracy that any attempt to do so will be shouted down with racists accusations.

    So if the “People of Color” crowd don’t literally mean color and don’t literally mean race then what do they mean? They’ll try to tell you that “People of Color” means anyone not of the “White” (Caucasian I guess?) race who has oppressed, discriminated, prejudiced and committed any other number of transgressions against the “black” and “brown” skinned peoples of the world (Whoever they’re suppossed to be). Well if you mean anyone who’s NOT Caucasian, be very careful because then you have to include the Semetic and Mongoloid races.

    Anthropologists classify the races in basically four (4) categories: Caucasian, Negroid, Semetic and Mongoloid. So if “People of Color” is anyone not of the Caucasian race (As the labeling of Bobby Jindal as a “Person of Color”,  because of suspected Semetic blood, would suggest) then that means the Semites and Mogoloids as well as the Negroids would ALL be “People of Color”. And is that REALLY what you want, leaders of the “People of Color” crowd? Because if you do you not only have to protest and file law suits on behalf of the “mistreatment” of “blacks” and hispanic’s. BUT ALSO for ALL the Asians and Semites which include Jews and Arabs  too.

    Are you sure that’s REALLY what you mean? Are you “Blacks” and Hispanics REALLY going to be quiet when “whitey” starts filling quota’s and affirmative action demands with Asians, Jews and Arabs because they’re “People of Color” too? Is that going to fit the “People of Color’s” agenda? Are they going to like it when “Whitey” starts spreading the affirmative action wealth to the other “People of Color”, the Mongoloids and Semites? Because if you only mean people of Negroid blood then say it. I have no problem with that. The continued fight for equality by “Black” people is not something I’m against and in most cases champion it, especially since my kids are mulatto meaning I  have a vested interest in equality for the “Black” man.

      This whole “People of Color” term is a term used by those with animosity towards the “white” man, who think they’re too intellectual and educated for their own good, and that good old “Lily-white, ivory-towered, harboring white-guilt apologist” crowd. Who think if they “Breathlessly” spout the phrase “People of Color” it absolves them of all their guilt and makes them feel better about themselves.

     This “People of Color” term is ussually spoken “BREATHLESSLY” to fiegn some kind of higher-minded idealism. Those that speak it especially the “white intellects” do it to imply altruism on their part and that anybody who does not “get it” or “objects” in anyway is just a common ignorant. These “Whitey’s” make me sick! Just because you “pat yourself on the back” because you think Halle Berry is “Beautiful” or that Denzel is a “Great Actor” does not mean your not racist. And just because you go around saying “People of Color” does not mean your not racsist either. Likewise all you “intellectualized” blacks, just because you want to brand yourself and your people a “Person of Color” does not mean you are smarter than the rest of us. And I do not appreciate your implied threat that any intellectual concern for the meaning of the phrase will be shouted down as a racsist belief.

     My wife lived what most would consider the “stereotypical” black experience. My friends in federal prison were not sell-out blacks, they knew what time it was. Any time I asked any of the black people in my life what they consider themselves, they always said unhesitatingly, BLACK. All this “People of Color” garbage is just that and it’s done by people with an agenda. But be careful because if anyone starts to wake-up, pay attention or gets some guts to question, a whole lot more people may get included in your “People of Color” club than you were willing to take in.

    And stop with the whole “Black and Brown skinned peoples of the world” nonsense, because it makes even less sense than the “People of Color” phrase. Because there is NO doubt my dad is a brown-skinned man despite his European ancestry. Do you want the quota system and affirmative action to be available to him? And if not why? Are you now guilty of discrimination? And against a brown-skinned man at that?

   If you mean race, say it. If you mean anybody not caucasian, say it. But if so you gotta let in a whole lot more people than you are probably willing. If you mean a specific race, say it. If you mean the Negroid race, say it.

     A Note:

      Do NOT criticize me for using the term Negroid. It is an ACCEPTED acedemic term to distinguish a specific race of people.

     But you see how ridiculous the phrase “People of Color” is? See how it can be interpreted in many different ways? See how it is nearly impossible to pin down what exactly does it mean and who it exactly includes? And how when you do get specific with the phrase it starts to mean things and includes  peoples those who promote the phrase never meant  it to be  nor  includes people those promters never wanted to include.

      The phrase is a dishonest phrase used to promote a political agenda and slience any criticism no matter how interested, concerned or honest that criticism may be.

    And don’t think there isn’t discrimination amongst the “white”. Does anyone think for a second that the W.A.S.P.’s or even the Irish do not consider Italians to be of inferoir bloodlines, even going so far as to label the the N-word? Or even Italians themselves who consider Sicilians to be of a lower class, even calling them the N-word?

    And how does a “fair-skinned” Hispanic get included in the “People of Color” crowd. The Hispanic has the Spaniard surname because of colonizing explorers who were of Caucasian, European, Meditteranean bloodlines. That’s right European Spaniards ARE considered Caucasian! FACT! These Spaniards mixed with other bloodlines on their exploratory expeditions that in many cases were NOT even of Negroid bloodlines. Somehow these Hispanics are now classified with “People of Color” when they probably have NO “People of Color” blood. See ridiculous and dishonest this phrase is? It can mean anything to anybody and manipulated to include anybody to fit a specific agenda.

     Civiliztions have been in existence for over 3,500 years. Did we all come from a common progenitor? Probably. Does it matter from where or from what race that progenitor originated? Not to me. At this point in civilization there has been so much mixing and mingling that there are NO pure blood races left anywhere in the world. We are all a mix of something or the other. Most times the only thing that signifies an ethnicity is the persons last name. I have relatives that have so many mixes they’re Italian in name only. And what difference does it make?

    I think the world is a better place for it’s diversity. The thing that’s killing the world is all this polarization from the “race-baiters” who promote a special interset. They pretend like they’re fighting for the rights of the minority classes but if someone had a magic-wand to wipe out inequality these so-called champions of the “underclass” and disenfranchised” would be the first to try and break that magic-wand because the day there is no more inequality is the day the jig is up for these charlatans. It is they who are the hypocrites as they fan the flames of racial resentment.

     There is NO such thing as an exclusive “People of Color”. Anyone promoting it is dishonest or brainwashed or both.

June 15, 2009 Posted by | blog, culture, entertainment, history, Life, news, people, personal, philosohy, Politics, random, religion, thoughts | 49 Comments