In our materialistic times, sneakers especially have taken hold of our youth culture. Many poor children (and pathetic adults) across the world would do just about anything for a pair of Jordans.
Posts Tagged ‘Rodney King’
Diddy Sued For $1 Trillion
January 30th, 2011 |
No Comments
All About the Benjamins? Fugetaboutit — 2011 is all about the trillions. In what can only be one of the more bizarre legal cases against famed music mogul Sean “Diddy” Combs, a Los Angeles woman has slapped the multi-millionaire Bad Boy boss for whopping $1 trillion, claiming that he fathered her child and was somehow [...]
15 Stars Swimming Laps in the Celeb Death Pool
September 29th, 2010 |
No Comments
Like infants set loose on a floor of broken glass, anti-freeze and exposed outlets, they often live on the edge of death by stupidity and substance abuse. Be it drugs, alcohol, excessive plastic surgery or other such heinously unnatural things as old age, some have been scooting closer than others.
Rodney King Engaged To Marry Civil Trial Juror
September 7th, 2010 |
No Comments
Rodney King — the victim of the brutal police beating that sparked the notorious Los Angeles racial riots — is set to marry one of the jurors from his controversial civil trial, RadarOnline.com reported Tuesday.King, now 44, recently proposed to Cynthia Kelley — Juror No. 5– who awarded King a $3.8 million payout in a [...]
Lincoln Mitchell: The Policeman, the President, the Professor, an Apology, and a Round of Beers
July 28th, 2009 |
No Comments
If Obama, Gates and Crowley ever get together for that beer, it will be a good photo and probably an interesting discussion, but it will not change how African Americans are treated by police.
Joan E. Dowlin: The Healer in Chief
July 25th, 2009 |
No Comments
Let’s look at the history of blacks and police in our nation in this century. The story is always familiar. The police say they are protecting lives and the community. They shoot first and ask questions later.
Race tensions
July 24th, 2009 |
No Comments
By Max Deveson
BBC News, Washington
"There is a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately."
That was how US President Barack Obama put the arrest of the black Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr into context.
His comments – in particular his description of the arresting officer’s actions as "stupid" – have attracted criticism in conservative circles, forcing him to make a surprise appearance at the daily White House press briefing in an attempt to calm the situation.
But for many in America, Mr Obama’s evocation of the country’s history of racial oppression will have great resonance.
Traffic stops
Professor Gates was arrested outside his own home. A passer-by had called the police after seeing him apparently attempting to force his way in through a damaged front door.
When Sgt James Crowley arrived, Professor Gates indicated that he was the owner of the property and reportedly began accusing Sgt Crowley of racism.
Sgt Crowley then arrested him for disorderly conduct, prompting Professor Gates, director of Harvard’s W.E.B. Du Bois Institute for African and African American Research, to allegdly start shouting: "This is what happens to black men in America."
Statistics suggest that he may have a point.
Racial profiling is defined by the UN as "the practice of police and other law enforcement officers relying, to any degree, on race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin as the basis for subjecting persons to investigatory activities or for determining whether an individual is engaged in criminal activity".
"I would say that this is the sort of thing that angers upper middle-class black people even more than it angers anyone else"
Ta-Nehisi Coates
Atlantic Monthly
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has put together a dossier looking at incidences of racial profiling throughout the US.
In Los Angeles – where memories of the police beating of an African-American man, Rodney King are still fresh – the ACLU cites a recent study by Professor Ian Ayres of Yale University which found that African-Americans are nearly three times as likely to be stopped by the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) as whites.
"These disparities are not justified by crime rates in different neighborhoods where people of color live," Professor Ayres writes. "Nor do the disparities arise because more police are assigned to black or Latino neighborhoods."
In Illinois, a state-sponsored study revealed that black and Hispanic motorists were more than twice as likely as white motorists to be subjected to "consent searches" by the police, yet white motorists were twice as likely to be found with contraband as a result of the searches.
Anger
President Obama has a personal connection to the Illinois statistics.
He sponsored the legislation (the Illinois Traffic Stops Statistics Act) that empowered the state authorities to collect the data on traffic stops.
It is clearly an issue that Mr Obama feels strongly about. During his presidential campaign, he pledged to "ban racial profiling", and his Attorney General, Eric Holder, has indicated that ending the practice is a "priority" for the administration.
Ta-Nehisi Coates, an African-American blogger for the Atlantic Monthly magazine, who writes regularly about the issue of race in America, thinks that Mr Obama’s personal experiences may have informed his opposition to racial profiling, and his reaction to Professor Gates’s arrest.
"I would say that this is the sort of thing that angers upper middle-class black people even more than it angers anyone else, because they tend to be individuals who, by society’s lights, are very accomplished," Mr Coates writes.
"Obama has lived as a member of that class for a large portion of his adult life… [his reaction is] not shocking… "
Law enforcement officials in the US are – understandably – unwilling to accept that police officers engage in racial profiling.
The LAPD, in its response to Professor Ayres’s study, acknowledged that the statistics showed that African-Americans and Latinos were more likely to be stopped than white people, but refused to concede that racial bias was causing the disparities.
And in Cambridge, Massachusetts, Police Commissioner Robert Haas has insisted that Professor Gates’s arrest was not motivated by racism, and that Sgt Crowley "basically did the best with the situation that was presented to him."
But African-Americans clearly believe that racial profiling is a big problem in the US.
The National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People (NAACP) is spearheading a campaign to pass the End Racial Profiling Act, which would outlaw the practice.
With presidential backing, and the example of Professor Gates to grab the public’s attention, it may not be long before Congress acts to make racial profiling a thing of the past. </p
This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation, The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.
Race tensions
July 24th, 2009 |
No Comments
By Max Deveson
BBC News, Washington
"There is a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately."
That was how US President Barack Obama put the arrest of the black Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr into context.
His comments – in particular his description of the arresting officer’s actions as "stupid" – have attracted criticism in conservative circles, forcing him to make a surprise appearance at the daily White House press briefing in an attempt to calm the situation.
But for many in America, Mr Obama’s evocation of the country’s history of racial oppression will have great resonance.
Traffic stops
Professor Gates was arrested outside his own home. A passer-by had called the police after seeing him apparently attempting to force his way in through a damaged front door.
When Sgt James Crowley arrived, Professor Gates indicated that he was the owner of the property and reportedly began accusing Sgt Crowley of racism.
Sgt Crowley then arrested him for disorderly conduct, prompting Professor Gates, director of Harvard’s W.E.B. Du Bois Institute for African and African American Research, to allegdly start shouting: "This is what happens to black men in America."
Statistics suggest that he may have a point.
Racial profiling is defined by the UN as "the practice of police and other law enforcement officers relying, to any degree, on race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin as the basis for subjecting persons to investigatory activities or for determining whether an individual is engaged in criminal activity".
"I would say that this is the sort of thing that angers upper middle-class black people even more than it angers anyone else"
Ta-Nehisi Coates
Atlantic Monthly
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has put together a dossier looking at incidences of racial profiling throughout the US.
In Los Angeles – where memories of the police beating of an African-American man, Rodney King are still fresh – the ACLU cites a recent study by Professor Ian Ayres of Yale University which found that African-Americans are nearly three times as likely to be stopped by the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) as whites.
"These disparities are not justified by crime rates in different neighborhoods where people of color live," Professor Ayres writes. "Nor do the disparities arise because more police are assigned to black or Latino neighborhoods."
In Illinois, a state-sponsored study revealed that black and Hispanic motorists were more than twice as likely as white motorists to be subjected to "consent searches" by the police, yet white motorists were twice as likely to be found with contraband as a result of the searches.
Anger
President Obama has a personal connection to the Illinois statistics.
He sponsored the legislation (the Illinois Traffic Stops Statistics Act) that empowered the state authorities to collect the data on traffic stops.
It is clearly an issue that Mr Obama feels strongly about. During his presidential campaign, he pledged to "ban racial profiling", and his Attorney General, Eric Holder, has indicated that ending the practice is a "priority" for the administration.
Ta-Nehisi Coates, an African-American blogger for the Atlantic Monthly magazine, who writes regularly about the issue of race in America, thinks that Mr Obama’s personal experiences may have informed his opposition to racial profiling, and his reaction to Professor Gates’s arrest.
"I would say that this is the sort of thing that angers upper middle-class black people even more than it angers anyone else, because they tend to be individuals who, by society’s lights, are very accomplished," Mr Coates writes.
"Obama has lived as a member of that class for a large portion of his adult life… [his reaction is] not shocking… "
Law enforcement officials in the US are – understandably – unwilling to accept that police officers engage in racial profiling.
The LAPD, in its response to Professor Ayres’s study, acknowledged that the statistics showed that African-Americans and Latinos were more likely to be stopped than white people, but refused to concede that racial bias was causing the disparities.
And in Cambridge, Massachusetts, Police Commissioner Robert Haas has insisted that Professor Gates’s arrest was not motivated by racism, and that Sgt Crowley "basically did the best with the situation that was presented to him."
But African-Americans clearly believe that racial profiling is a big problem in the US.
The National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People (NAACP) is spearheading a campaign to pass the End Racial Profiling Act, which would outlaw the practice.
With presidential backing, and the example of Professor Gates to grab the public’s attention, it may not be long before Congress acts to make racial profiling a thing of the past. </p
This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation, The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.
Race tensions
July 24th, 2009 |
No Comments
By Max Deveson
BBC News, Washington
"There is a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately."
That was how US President Barack Obama put the arrest of the black Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr into context.
His comments – in particular his description of the arresting officer’s actions as "stupid" – have attracted criticism in conservative circles, forcing him to make a surprise appearance at the daily White House press briefing in an attempt to calm the situation.
But for many in America, Mr Obama’s evocation of the country’s history of racial oppression will have great resonance.
Traffic stops
Professor Gates was arrested outside his own home. A passer-by had called the police after seeing him apparently attempting to force his way in through a damaged front door.
When Sgt James Crowley arrived, Professor Gates indicated that he was the owner of the property and reportedly began accusing Sgt Crowley of racism.
Sgt Crowley then arrested him for disorderly conduct, prompting Professor Gates, director of Harvard’s W.E.B. Du Bois Institute for African and African American Research, to allegdly start shouting: "This is what happens to black men in America."
Statistics suggest that he may have a point.
Racial profiling is defined by the UN as "the practice of police and other law enforcement officers relying, to any degree, on race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin as the basis for subjecting persons to investigatory activities or for determining whether an individual is engaged in criminal activity".
"I would say that this is the sort of thing that angers upper middle-class black people even more than it angers anyone else"
Ta-Nehisi Coates
Atlantic Monthly
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has put together a dossier looking at incidences of racial profiling throughout the US.
In Los Angeles – where memories of the police beating of an African-American man, Rodney King are still fresh – the ACLU cites a recent study by Professor Ian Ayres of Yale University which found that African-Americans are nearly three times as likely to be stopped by the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) as whites.
"These disparities are not justified by crime rates in different neighborhoods where people of color live," Professor Ayres writes. "Nor do the disparities arise because more police are assigned to black or Latino neighborhoods."
In Illinois, a state-sponsored study revealed that black and Hispanic motorists were more than twice as likely as white motorists to be subjected to "consent searches" by the police, yet white motorists were twice as likely to be found with contraband as a result of the searches.
Anger
President Obama has a personal connection to the Illinois statistics.
He sponsored the legislation (the Illinois Traffic Stops Statistics Act) that empowered the state authorities to collect the data on traffic stops.
It is clearly an issue that Mr Obama feels strongly about. During his presidential campaign, he pledged to "ban racial profiling", and his Attorney General, Eric Holder, has indicated that ending the practice is a "priority" for the administration.
Ta-Nehisi Coates, an African-American blogger for the Atlantic Monthly magazine, who writes regularly about the issue of race in America, thinks that Mr Obama’s personal experiences may have informed his opposition to racial profiling, and his reaction to Professor Gates’s arrest.
"I would say that this is the sort of thing that angers upper middle-class black people even more than it angers anyone else, because they tend to be individuals who, by society’s lights, are very accomplished," Mr Coates writes.
"Obama has lived as a member of that class for a large portion of his adult life… [his reaction is] not shocking… "
Law enforcement officials in the US are – understandably – unwilling to accept that police officers engage in racial profiling.
The LAPD, in its response to Professor Ayres’s study, acknowledged that the statistics showed that African-Americans and Latinos were more likely to be stopped than white people, but refused to concede that racial bias was causing the disparities.
And in Cambridge, Massachusetts, Police Commissioner Robert Haas has insisted that Professor Gates’s arrest was not motivated by racism, and that Sgt Crowley "basically did the best with the situation that was presented to him."
But African-Americans clearly believe that racial profiling is a big problem in the US.
The National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People (NAACP) is spearheading a campaign to pass the End Racial Profiling Act, which would outlaw the practice.
With presidential backing, and the example of Professor Gates to grab the public’s attention, it may not be long before Congress acts to make racial profiling a thing of the past. </p
This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation, The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.
Mike Lux: Martin Luther King, Jr. vs. Rodney King
July 14th, 2009 |
No Comments
There are two rather fundamentally opposed ways of viewing the political process, and they are playing themselves out right now across a range of important…
Memo to Clinton: US ain’t top dog
The US doesn’t necessarily lead the pack in world affairs – something Hillary Clinton should remember on her Asian tour
Speaking in Washington before embarking on this week’s Asian tour, Hillary Clinton set out the most definitive version yet of how the Obama administration intends to deal with the world. The US secretary of state spoke of “a new era of engagement based on common interests, shared values, and mutual respect” and of a foreign policy “blending principle and pragmatism”.
Contrasting this collaborative approach with the “for us or against us” stance of the Bush administration, Clinton said the US would opt for diplomacy first when dealing with Iran, North Korea and other nations or adversaries. There were no guarantees of success; and dialogue did not imply acceptance of repressive regimes. But “we cannot be afraid or unwilling to engage … as long as engagement might advance our interests”.
Clinton’s call for a “multi-partner” rather than a multi-polar world is the diplomatic equivalent of police brutality victim Rodney King’s famous (and unsuccessful) plea for mutual tolerance at the height of the 1992 Los Angeles race riots. “People, I just want to say, you know, can we all get along?” asked King. Clinton’s similar, less eloquent call for international amity and understanding may also have limited impact. Today North Korea’s hothead leadership lambasted her, saying she resembled “a pensioner going shopping“. So no breakthrough just yet.
More surprisingly perhaps, Clinton’s visits this week to India and Thailand, where she met leaders of south-east Asian nations and her Chinese, Russian, South Korean and Japanese counterparts, suggested to some that the US may struggle to maintain constructive partnerships with its allies, let alone its enemies. These tensions are only partly attributable to George Bush’s toxic legacy and resulting anti-Americanism. They have more to do with perceived changes in the global balance of power, principally a post-crash decline in US clout and a parallel expansion of Chinese and Indian influence.
In Delhi, Clinton was publicly slapped down over pre-Copenhagen pressure from Washington and others for binding caps on carbon emissions, with environment minister Jairam Ramesh complaining about mooted carbon tariffs on Indian exports. At the same time, she acquiesced in Bush’s nuclear technology deal with India, which drove a coach and horses through the international non-proliferation regime, and gave a green light to massive future US arms sales to India, hardly reassuring prospects for Pakistan.
Clinton also appears to have tip-toed around the issue of divided Kashmir, mindful perhaps of British foreign secretary David Miliband’s bruising experience in Delhi earlier this year. This is odd, given the high importance Washington attaches to its Afghanistan-Pakistan strategy and its wish that Pakistani troops, currently deployed along the Line of Control facing India, be redirected into the battle against the Taliban and Islamist militants. These and other strains are certain to resurface once the jolly bonhomie surrounding Clinton’s visit, more resembling a campaign trail meet-and-greet than a diplomatic summit, dissipates.
“Obama is committed to ratifying the comprehensive test ban treaty and strengthening the non-proliferation treaty [India is party to neither] … He also intends for the US to be part of the international effort to replace the Kyoto protocol with a treaty-based climate control regime including India, China and other emerging powers,” noted Strobe Talbott of the Brookings Institution thinktank in a recent article. Such fundamental differences do not bode well for the strengthened, strategic partnership with India that Clinton enthused about.
Clinton’s declaration in Thailand that the US was “back” in south-east Asia, and intended to give greater priority to its friends in the region, also elicited mixed responses. Her ever tougher line on North Korea, coupled with US pressure on Asean members to do more to confront the Burmese junta, makes many countries nervous.
This cage-rattling could yet prove counter-productive. Old ally Japan, for example, may be about to elect a party pledged to re-examine the role of the US military in the Asia-Pacific region. Others, such as Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore, are increasingly drawn towards Beijing’s powerful economic orbit. For its part, China itself may no longer be a US enemy – but it remains unclear whether, on a range of international issues, it can really be classed as a friend. Mostly China suits itself. These days it can afford to.
Yet possibly the biggest obstacle to the “new mindset” partnerships Clinton envisaged in her Washington speech is of her own creation – her very old-fashioned assumption that, in all such arrangements, the US will naturally be top dog and pack leader. This is what Iranian conservatives term the “global arrogance”. Memo to HC: it ain’t necessarily so.