Friends of Webster

Raised in the house, but field certified.

MSNBC Article, Statistics from a Statistic and Why I want to be an Exception

FAMU 2 12409.jpgAfter soaking up this sad article, i’ve begun to rethink my previous harsh words attributed to low minority recruiting numbers at certain institutions.  No one seems to be going/staying in college and the few black men that achieve academic notoriety are being catered to by attractive colleges and universities with household names. This is an area that the President has failed to address, implicitly or explicitly.

This is a pretty scary thought but  if the trend continues, there will be an infantismal amount of doctors, lawyers, executives and politicians in MY life time.

Consider this…

  • 20% of black men over age 18 are incarcerated (2006), accounting for 49% of all imprisoned Americans
  • 72% of black males that dropped out of HS are unemployed (2004)
  • 50% of black males (including HS Education) are unemployed
  • According to the 2007 Census Bureau’s numbers, of the 11,671,000 black males that responded to the census questionnaires, only 1,273,000 had a bachelor’s degree
  • The link below shows a shallow picture of a 29% graduation rate for students at HBCUs in six years

MSNBC Link  Black Male College Graduation Figures Dismal

BET Link Too few….

The daunting numbers continue for pages but President Obama has yet to address these issues head on. The problem may not be minority recruiting; low enrollment numbers may just be a faltering sense of self-responsibility amongst us black males.  The aforementioned statistics are some of the motivating factors that will drive me through Law School.  Anyone, besides Bill Cosby, want to lead the way? Kobe? Wait…Kanye? Lebron? Ok…RNC Chairman Steele. 

March 31st, 2009 Posted by | Because Barack Wouldn't Do it | no comments

USCGA Law Professor: Proposal for a Hybrid Court System for Detainees

NCBC.jpg

Pictured: Naval Consolidated Brig-Charleston (South Carolina)

CDR Glenn Sulmasy’s Most Recent Commentary: Homeland Security Today

Commentary: 

The detention centers at Guantanamo Bay, Norfolk, Charleston and Bagram, Iraq have become international symbols of the exercised executive privilege of former President George W. Bush. John Yoo’s succession of Memos, villified by the left and tolerated by the right, expanded the executive privilege by deeming the 5th and 8th ammendment moot.  The necessity of those memos, with regard to our National Security, begs to be proven necessary.

The political debate has ensued and has since left President Obama and Attorney General Holder’s team of scholars, lawyers and partisans attempting to determine the most effective step forward.  Within days, the term “Enemy Combatant” ceased as a legal application to the detainees in South Carolina, Virginia, Bagram and GITMO.  Pundits (who haven’t taken the time to read Justice O’Connor’s June 28, 2004 Writ of Certiorari) have taken issue with Obama’s recent initiative to reshape our foreign policy regarding past and potential terrorists.  It should be of note that the primary contention of the Government’s case against Yaser Hamdi in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld was the following:

“The Government asserts that it initially detained and interrogated Yaser Hamdi in Afghanistan before transferring him to [GITMO] in January 2002. In April 2002, upon learning that Hamdi is an American citizen, authorities transferred him to a naval brig in Norfolk, Virginia, where he remained until a recent transfer to a brig in Charleston, South Carolina. The Government contends that Hamdi is an “enemy combatant,” and that this status justifies holding him in the United States indefinitely-without formal charges or proceedings-unless and until it makes the determination that access to counsel or further process is warranted.”

The government’s argument was in effect, circular.  The Supreme Court remanded the Fourth Circuit court of Appeals’ ruling. Prior to 2008, the definition of an “enemy combatant” was any person in an armed conflict who could be properly detained under the laws of war. Assign the “enemy combatant” title to a person that you want to detain and the name will enable the government to justify indefinite detainment without “meaningful judical review.”

The Military Commissions Act (HR-6166) contained fundamental and constitutional flaws. Section seven was deemed unconstitutional.  There are no means for which the federal or military tribunal sytem could proceed without providing the appropriate rights for many of the detainees that have reaped the benefits of certain Executive Privileges. The recently indicted Al-Marri, however, will be the poster boy for what may be one of the first steps in the right direction.  While Former-Vice President Dick Cheney was explicit in his opposition to Obama’s National Security policies, citing an unraveling of the Bush-era policies that kept us safe, Holder answered with the indictment of the suspected terrorist.  A move to symbolize the end of infinite detainment and the beginning of prosecuting alleged Al-Queda and Taliban operatives.

The court that Al-Marri is to be tried in will surely render a damning verdict. But herein lies the problem that Glenn Sulmasy has repeatedly addressed in foreign policy commentary. There is no impartial court, there is no non-partisan court, there is no non-military court that could handle the classified evidence that would be disclosed. There seems to be little solution.  The solution to GITMO conundrum is as complex as the solution to curing our economy of failed derivative trading. We are a partisan nation with a political problem on our hands. There are two questions to consider:

1. Is terrorism a global feasance (rate of attacks/attempted attacks on foreign soil)?

2. Why are we the target of Al Queda/Taliban attacks?

If the answer to the first question is yes, then maybe we should respond to this problem with a global answer.  Ridding ourselves of the burden of adopting a functioning court system to address these issues would relieve our government.  If the answer is no, then why are we the most attractive target?

President Obama has answered that question and his staff is addressing many of those reasons, decreasing the likelihood of another attack on our soil. As for my opinion, the GITMO closure is not as easy as liberal pundits would like it to be but the establishment should NOT remain an option. Neither should the detainment facilities on continental U.S. soil.  The symbolism of the prisons have incited violence and harbored hatred.  As a person who has been behind those walls in South Carolina, I have a unique perspective.  Amidst frequent boredom and discontent in my short time there, I maintained sanity by praying and envisioning what I would do with my freedom.  My time was finite but for the ”enemy combatants” it was infinite and it seems that this practice has been recognized as unconstitutional. This harbors a hatred that manifests into the Anti-American sentiment that we have fought with force for nearly seven years.

At this point, it may be better to absolve the D.O.D. and D.O.J. of all detention and trial duties and opt for a more international approach, free of the ireconcilable differences between U.S. Military and Federal laws and standards. And far away from U.S. soil. 

 

*CDR Sulmasy’s awaited book, “The National Security Court System: A Natural Evolution of Justice in an Age of Terror” will be in stores in June. The ideas will surely impact the Obama Administration’s outlook and agenda.  It will also pulverize any argument against a hybrid court and it will lay out clear reasoning for the necessity of the court system and why it is the answer to the GITMO conundrum. 

March 23rd, 2009 Posted by | Political Commentary | no comments

Colbert v. Steele

The Colbert Report Mon – Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Michael Steele’s Rap Battle Response
comedycentral.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor Mark Sanford

March 20th, 2009 Posted by | Music Speaks | no comments

Civil Rights Issues on the Forefront

 

 

VOA News: Supreme Court to Rule on Civil Rights Laws

CQ Politics: Voting Rights Act Run its Course?

Global Research: John Payton on the Abu-Jamal Case: Racial Discrimination in Jury Selection

Chicago Tribune: Holder’s Remarks: A Good, bad sign?

CNN: Highway Robbery: Tenaha, Texas

March 16th, 2009 Posted by | Civil Rights/Constitutional Law | no comments

Pennsylvania Ave?