Recently Don Lemon made news when he mentioned his support for Stop And Frisk. He was quoted as saying, "Would you rather be politically correct or safe and alive?" He also went on to justify it by saying that '"[I]f you question many people in New York City, even some black and Hispanic people,” Lemon claimed, “they will tell you that on the surface they don’t really have an issue with stop-question-and-frisk. Not the idea of it, at least. Not if the controversial policy was conducted like the occasional, random airport screening.”"
Did he stop right there? Nope,this fool kept going, and said, "there are many among the minority community who believe “in theory” that “we’d rather be inconvenienced by being stopped by police than shot by gun-wielding criminals on the street.” However, he said, it’s become too easy for police to become “so drunk with power that they abuse it.”
I'm over here still stuck on his comment about being safe and alive vs being politically correct. It makes me forget my grammar and I want to ask him where is his mother at? Where does he live? Then I want to get mad and ask, How far did somebody have to stick their hand up his ass to get him to say these things, because this guy is a straight up puppet. I think somebody is paying this fool, there has to be. I guess I'm not the only one who is telling this fool to GET THE FUCK OUTTA HERE. In fact, I had to do it twice. Unfortunately, I'm not as concise and eloquent as some folks, so I'll have to give props to twitter for chopping him up using less than 140 characters.
Now here's the real kicker about what Don Lemon said about stop and frisk. Didn't this fool sue Tower records back in 2001 for racial profiling though?<< Is he even serious?! Did he forget about that or did he he strike a deal with somebody affiliated with that company in exchange that he throw his race under the bus by any means necessary? Then again, maybe the incident hit too close to home. Maybe it got in his head so much that he decided he must have done, said, or acted 'too Black' that day, which caused him to spend as much time as he could in order to 'cultivate' himself into this image that causes him to deny the people who look like him at all costs. Maybe it affected him similar to the the16 Street Baptist Church bombing in Birmingham Alabama which resulted in the killing of four Black girls, one of which was Condoleezza Rice's playmate. That incident still affects her to this day, and maybe the profiling was Don Lemon's moment of clarity that he's not really ready to address yet. I don't know, but something is really wrong with this guy. The question is, What is it?
Showing posts with label stop and frisk. Show all posts
Showing posts with label stop and frisk. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 6, 2013
Monday, August 19, 2013
Bloomberg is Hell Bent on Finding Ways to Scrutinize Folks- my 9/11 rant for the year
I guess the backlash against the Stop and Frisk policies in New York has got the mayor of New York mad as hell. Now he wants to fingerprint people who live in public housing probably because in his head, all of "those" people are drug addicts and are going to magically get away with more crime than usual since the police force is under fire for racial profiling. "Those" people couldn't possibly be working honest jobs and or attempt to raise children or try to create a better life in a foreign country. I mean, they must be doing something wrong. He has to come up with a plan to protect them, I mean after all, isn't that what stop and frisk was supposed to be about? He obviously cares soooo much about these people that he's willing to make sure they get constantly searched and probed or fingerprinted to ensure their safety. I'm going to have to tell Mike Bloomberg to Get The Fuck Outta here.
Time and time again we have been told that in order to be free, we must sacrifice something, especially after the whole 9/11 fiasco jumped off. People have argued about how the fingerprint policy is going to help determine which residents live there vs those who are visiting, or trespassing. Why does he feel the need to monitor that? People have visitors all the time regardless if they live in public housing or not. I'm sure those who advocate the fingerprint policy would love to have their visitors and everyone in their residences get fingerprinted prior to entry. Why doesn't he implement these policies in his neighborhood to keep them safe? My guess is that his neighbors would hate him for it, and they'd be very upset about having their style cramped like that. Why not afford the same basic luxury to those in public housing? I can hear some of these people now. They may say something like, "These public housing units are being paid for by taxpayer's money, and I don't like the idea that these people are busy committing crimes on my dime. It's bad enough they're all on welfare...bla bla, bla (insert any and all stereotypical race baiting here while ignoring the fact that crime happens between people who live near each other in general)", followed up with their offers of draconian crap like sterilization, forced abortion for all of those "baby mamas", bulldozing the public housing units, or by letting them kill themselves and it'll all sort itself out etc." To them, I present the following situation:
Let's play a game for a bit. What if Stop and Frisk were allowed in their own neighborhoods? What if the fingerprint policy were implemented? How would things turn out? I mean, how else are they going to have their dealers show up with whatever illegally procured drugs they use in the privacy and safety of their homes? What if they travel to their dealer's home to purchase it? Would they want to be stopped by police while on foot or driving? What if they had a visitor in their home who happened to be a former convicted felon? What if it's a close family member who had a possession charge? I would think they would say it isn't anybody's business whether or not a convicted felon or someone who was formerly in the prison system enters their home. I'm thinking they would say that it's up to the resident who decides which person gets the chance to enter their home. Maybe it's just me, but I think they really wouldn't like the idea of being policed like that. I'm thinking they might even invent a term for it. I suspect they would call it "Martial Law" and they would fight tooth and nail to prevent it from happening.
My initial instincts on Mayor Bloomberg's behavior indicate that he really doesn't care about safety of the citizens. He's acting like he may have a financial investment in the privatized prison industry and that he may have a vested interest in making sure the prisons have people in them, as in "more inmates equals more profit". That being said, I feel some investigative reporting is in order. Where are the potential inmates you ask? They can be found in public housing. I guess it's easy to go after people that no one ever cared about. They have no money, they don't look or act like him and his friends. It's like shooting fish in a barrel, or collecting the low hanging fruit, so to speak. In his eyes, and and others in this country who may not necessarily be rich, these people are vermin and it is their job to keep them in order. It's too difficult to catch the crook in the suit with the attaché whose about to swindle millions of dollars out of a company, or the one who fooled a bunch of hard working Americans into giving away their life's savings under the promise of making a huge return on their investment, only to fuck off the money like entitled bratty spoiled trust fund babies. <<But hey, at least they got that one, right? It took a whole lot of work, but they got him so I guess there's that. However, I'm waiting on them to get Larry Silverstein, the owner of the World Trade Towers who purchased them shortly before the 9/11 attacks and conveniently took out a multi million dollar insurance policy on the buildings only to have them burn down (insurance fraud?) while killing many innocent people at the same time, George W Bush, Dick Cheney, the bankers and CEOs who crashed the economy, and countless other people who made things very difficult for a lot of folks in this country. Maybe since I'm employed, and have a house, I should adopt an attitude that says "Well, better them than me." The day I do that is the day I have to tell myself Get The Fuck Outta Here With That Bullshit because that's waaay out of character for me. I'd rather say something to the effect of, "See, look at everything I mentioned here in reference to Michael Bloomberg and his ilk. This is what happens when you let "those people" have money.
Time and time again we have been told that in order to be free, we must sacrifice something, especially after the whole 9/11 fiasco jumped off. People have argued about how the fingerprint policy is going to help determine which residents live there vs those who are visiting, or trespassing. Why does he feel the need to monitor that? People have visitors all the time regardless if they live in public housing or not. I'm sure those who advocate the fingerprint policy would love to have their visitors and everyone in their residences get fingerprinted prior to entry. Why doesn't he implement these policies in his neighborhood to keep them safe? My guess is that his neighbors would hate him for it, and they'd be very upset about having their style cramped like that. Why not afford the same basic luxury to those in public housing? I can hear some of these people now. They may say something like, "These public housing units are being paid for by taxpayer's money, and I don't like the idea that these people are busy committing crimes on my dime. It's bad enough they're all on welfare...bla bla, bla (insert any and all stereotypical race baiting here while ignoring the fact that crime happens between people who live near each other in general)", followed up with their offers of draconian crap like sterilization, forced abortion for all of those "baby mamas", bulldozing the public housing units, or by letting them kill themselves and it'll all sort itself out etc." To them, I present the following situation:
Let's play a game for a bit. What if Stop and Frisk were allowed in their own neighborhoods? What if the fingerprint policy were implemented? How would things turn out? I mean, how else are they going to have their dealers show up with whatever illegally procured drugs they use in the privacy and safety of their homes? What if they travel to their dealer's home to purchase it? Would they want to be stopped by police while on foot or driving? What if they had a visitor in their home who happened to be a former convicted felon? What if it's a close family member who had a possession charge? I would think they would say it isn't anybody's business whether or not a convicted felon or someone who was formerly in the prison system enters their home. I'm thinking they would say that it's up to the resident who decides which person gets the chance to enter their home. Maybe it's just me, but I think they really wouldn't like the idea of being policed like that. I'm thinking they might even invent a term for it. I suspect they would call it "Martial Law" and they would fight tooth and nail to prevent it from happening.
My initial instincts on Mayor Bloomberg's behavior indicate that he really doesn't care about safety of the citizens. He's acting like he may have a financial investment in the privatized prison industry and that he may have a vested interest in making sure the prisons have people in them, as in "more inmates equals more profit". That being said, I feel some investigative reporting is in order. Where are the potential inmates you ask? They can be found in public housing. I guess it's easy to go after people that no one ever cared about. They have no money, they don't look or act like him and his friends. It's like shooting fish in a barrel, or collecting the low hanging fruit, so to speak. In his eyes, and and others in this country who may not necessarily be rich, these people are vermin and it is their job to keep them in order. It's too difficult to catch the crook in the suit with the attaché whose about to swindle millions of dollars out of a company, or the one who fooled a bunch of hard working Americans into giving away their life's savings under the promise of making a huge return on their investment, only to fuck off the money like entitled bratty spoiled trust fund babies. <<But hey, at least they got that one, right? It took a whole lot of work, but they got him so I guess there's that. However, I'm waiting on them to get Larry Silverstein, the owner of the World Trade Towers who purchased them shortly before the 9/11 attacks and conveniently took out a multi million dollar insurance policy on the buildings only to have them burn down (insurance fraud?) while killing many innocent people at the same time, George W Bush, Dick Cheney, the bankers and CEOs who crashed the economy, and countless other people who made things very difficult for a lot of folks in this country. Maybe since I'm employed, and have a house, I should adopt an attitude that says "Well, better them than me." The day I do that is the day I have to tell myself Get The Fuck Outta Here With That Bullshit because that's waaay out of character for me. I'd rather say something to the effect of, "See, look at everything I mentioned here in reference to Michael Bloomberg and his ilk. This is what happens when you let "those people" have money.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)