Dec 23, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
The city of Rocky Mount commissioned sculptor Erik Blome--who had cast sculptures of Rosa Parks and Thurgood Marshall (first black Supreme Court justice) to create a statue of Martin Luther King.
Reports the UK Independent, "White sculptor's 'un-African' statue of Martin Luther King divides the South" (22 December 2003):
It was in the North Carolina city that the civil rights leader first tested what would become his most famous speech, declaring in November 1962: "My friends in Rocky Mount, I have a dream tonight." But plans to honour Dr King's memory by commissioning a bronze statue have triggered a huge disagreement in what is already a divided city, with members of the black population making accusations against white officials.
The critics say the pose of the statue appears "arrogant" and Dr King's face does not look realistic. But what has really upset them is that the sculptor is white. The critics are demanding that the sculpture be recast - at least its head - with a different pose and a more "African" face. Kimberle Evans, one of the most outspoken critics of the $56,000 (£32,000) statue, said: "We need an artist who can relate."
To your racism?
Recommended Reading:
The Destruction of Martin Luther King's Dream of a Colorblind Society by Onkar Ghate
"It is no surprise that America is growing more racist, since the affirmative action and multiculturalist programs are themselves based on racist premises."
What We Should Remember on Martin Luther King Day: Judge People by Their Character, Not Skin Color by Edwin A. Locke
What should we remember on Martin Luther King Day? In his "I Have a Dream" speech Dr. King said: "I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."Dec 23, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
You can't miss this photo of Egyptian foreign minister Ahmed Maher after being assaulted in Jerusalem by Palestinians as Maher tried to pray at the Al Aqsa Mosque. In a dispatch from the Jerusalem Post, the New York Sun reports:
Palestinian Authority officials reacted with fury and embarrassment to the attack. Some P.A. officials first claimed Israel instigated the attack to drive a wedge between the Palestinian Arabs and Egypt. But when pictures of Mr. Maher being assaulted by scores of Palestinian Arabs were aired, there was great embarrassment among senior P.A. officials.
Dec 22, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
From ZDNet News:
Although the official interim report from the U.S.-Canada Power System Outage Task Force does not conclusively state that the MSBlast worm contributed to the blackout, there is ample circumstantial evidence that it did.
First, the blackout occurred just three days after the MSBlast attack started. Second, both primary and backup Windows computer systems at FirstEnergy (the Ohio-based utility company where the blackout began) were reported to have crashed just prior to the blackout. Third, FirstEnergy had trouble with the Slammer worm last January. And fourth, evidence suggests FirstEngery's IT department was slow in general to patch OS vulnerabilities in the past.
BUT DON'T TAKE my word for it. Bruce Schneier, president of the security company Counterpane, doesn't believe the interim report either. In addition, SecurityFocus columnist Kevin Poulsen first suggested the link not long after the blackout. And antivirus researcher Mikko Hypponen, manager of F-Secure Antivirus research, states in the December 2003 issue of Vanity Fair that while MSBlast didn't cause the blackout, the blackout wouldn't have happened without MSBlast.
Dec 21, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
From the UK Telegraph ["Saddam not a dictator at BBC"]:
...descriptions of Saddam Hussein are the latest target of a [BBC] corporation diktat. "An email has been circulated telling us not to refer to Saddam as a dictator," I'm told. "Instead, we are supposed to describe him as the former leader of Iraq. "Apparently, because his presidency was endorsed in a referendum, he was technically elected. Hence the word dictator is banned. It's all rather ridiculous." The Beeb insists that the email merely restates existing guidelines. "We wanted to remind journalists whose work is seen and heard internationally of the need to use neutral language," says a spokesman.
"Technically elected"? (Bear in mind that Iraquis were forced to "vote" for Saddam). "Neutral" to whom? "President" Castro?Dec 21, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses
"I am not trying to say that [the Americans] are angels! They have their interests; they came to Iraq for that reason, not to free the Iraqis. But the fruit is, in fact, liberation." --Chaldean Bishop Louis Sako of Kirkuk [Zenit]
Dec 21, 2003 | Dollars & Crosses, Dollars & Crosses 2
From FoxNews [Hat Tip: B. Harburg-Thomson]:Libya has agreed to end its pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and allow international inspectors to enter the country and search for such weapons, President Bush announced Friday...Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi has admitted trying to develop weapons of mass destruction and now plans to halt all such programs, Bush said...Bush said the United States and Britain, wary of Libyan promises, would watch closely to make sure al-Qaddafi keeps his word. And he said Libya's promises on weapons aren't enough; it must "fully engage in the war against terror" as well. If Libya "takes these essential steps and demonstrates its seriousness," Bush held out the promise of helping Libya build "a more free and prosperous country."
...The U.N. Security Council ended sanctions against Libya on Sept. 12 after al-Qaddafi's government took responsibility for the [1988 bombing of a Pan Am jet over Lockerbie, Scotland, that killed 270 people] and agreed to pay $2.7 billion to the victims' families.
Observe that the best that the U.N. could offer Libya for their 1988 bombing of a Pan Am jet over Lockerbie, Scotland was to give Libya chairmanship of the so-called U.N. Commission on Human Rights (while kicking the U.S. off the council). See Another United Nations Sham: Libyan leader Colonel Gadaffi to Head the U.N. Human Rights Commission for details of the "U.N. Human Rights" sham. "Multilateralists" and advocates of the "international community" must be wondering how did the U.S. and Britain achieve such a concession without the "assistance" of the United Nations?...But the United States has kept its own 17-year embargo in place.
If you are an admirer of "Old Europe" foreign policy you must be thinking: Doesn't the U.S. know that such a policy does not "work"? All it does is to create "resentment." How does one "build bridges" with such an "unilateral" foreign policy, clearly not approved by Howard Dean, Kofi-Annan, and his merry band of U.N. approved dictators? Dictators must be cuddled, kissed, and appeased....Libya had relied heavily on foreign assistance for its weapons programs. It had already made overtures suggesting it would slow or halt its programs to improve its international standing.
Foreign "assistance" from whom? Anyone from the "Axis of Weasels"? The report does not say.The U.S. intelligence statements on Libya's alleged weapons programs suggest efforts in that country were not as advanced as Iraq's were before the U.S.-led invasion. At the White House, Bush said the war in Iraq and efforts to stop North Korea's nuclear program had sent a clear message to countries such as Libya that they must abandon weapons programs."In word and in action, we have clarified the choices left to potential adversaries," Bush said. That was an apparent reference to Iran and North Korea, two other countries that the United States contends are trying to develop weapons of mass destruction. Without naming them, Bush added: "I hope other leaders will find an example" in Libya's action. ["Libya to Allow Weapons Inspections", FoxNews, December 20, 2003]
To quote from a previous Dollars and Crosses new item from the The London Telegraph (September 13, 2003) that quoted an interview of Italian Prime Minister Berlusconi:"I said, given the enormous and paradoxical success of fundamentalism, why don't we reform the UN? Let us say to Mr X or Y in this or that dictatorship, you must recognise human rights in your country and we give you six to 12 months to do so, or else we intervene. "We can do this now because there is no countervailing power," he said referring to the collapse of communism in the Soviet Union."...Yes! By force if necessary, because that is the only way to show it is not a joke. We said to Saddam, do it or we come. And we came and we did it." A spokesman for Mr Berlusconi said the prime minister had been telephoned recently by Col Gaddafi of Libya, who said: "I will do whatever the Americans want, because I saw what happened in Iraq, and I was afraid."
Thanks to America's words and deeds the world is, in fact, a safer place. America must not stop until it End States That Sponsor Terrorism.***
From Cox and Forkum:
Recommended Reading:Thinking it Alone: U.S. Must Reject the Evil Doctrine of "Multilateralism" by Alex Epstein
Military decisions are decisions about life and death--about what should be done to protect us from enemies who seek our destruction. If our leaders are to fulfill their obligation to defend our country, they must--starting with Iraq--reject the poison of "multilateralism" and replace it with the virtue of independent, rational judgment.Libya Gets Away With Terrorist Acts Against the United States by Alexander Marriott
At a time when the United States of America are fighting a war against International Terrorism and Terrorist States, the last thing the country needs is the appearance of weakness or appeasement. But the settlement that is looking more and more likely between the families of those who perished in Pam Am flight 103 and the Libyan government, that had that plane destroyed, is just such an act of appeasement and weakness that, if it comes to fruition, will only embolden clandestine acts of terror by states hostile to the United States.Another United Nations Sham: Libyan leader Colonel Gadaffi to Head the U.N. Human Rights Commission by Brett Schaefer
Even the most creative scriptwriter couldn't top the real-life plot twist the U.N. Commission on Human Rights will have concocted when Libya becomes its chairman."Multilateralism's" One-Way Street by Robert W. Tracinski
The past week has shown us that "multilateralism" is really a one-way street--a street that consistently runs against American interests.Lockerbie Verdict Vindicates Continued Sanctions Against Libya by James Phillips
The outcome of the Lockerbie bombing trial underscores the need for a firm U.S. policy toward Libyan dictator Muammar Qadhafi.The UN Human Rights Agenda: A Strategy of Diversion by Anne Bayefsky
UN intergovernmental human rights machinery is not keen on specifics. Its members include some of the most notorious human rights violators in the world today: China, Cuba, Iran, Libya, Saudi Arabia, and Syria. Those countries prefer devoting UN funds, (22% of which are from the United States), to criticizing Israel - lest attention wander too close to home.The United Nations Against Individual Rights by Jeff Jacoby
If the UN 'Human Rights' Commission were really concerned with human rights, the accession of a ghoulish regime like Libya's to the chair would indeed be a scandal. But the commission's true purposes are to give Third World bullies a venue for grandstanding, to harangue Western democracies, to ensure that the world's cruelest rulers escape condemnation, and, of course, to bash Israel. There's nothing in that agenda to disqualify Libya. Or, for that matter, Vietnam, Saudi Arabia, China, Syria, Sudan, or Zimbabwe -- each a notorious human-rights violator and each a commission member in good standing.UN Confidence Games: Libya as the Chairman of the U.N.'s Human Rights Commission? by Ken Adelman
With the official representatives of Libya and Syria having control over key United Nations agencies, you wonder just how much wisdom the UN can impart to guide American foreign policy.
