Tuesday, January 26, 2016

Polygamy Is NOT The Solution For Black America?

Polygamy Is NOT The Solution For Black America?

NB Commentary: Let me preface my commentary with these words, yes, my commentary is biased, yes, it may have even been a little bit emotional, and yes, I may have been a little curt if not with a tinge of anger, but sometimes when someone gets on YouTube and provides "disinformation" as if they are an expert on a subject they are talking about... well it just rubs me. It is a particular rub for me in this case as this is a subject that I have explored, studied, understood it pros and cons across cultures, etc. So, jump into this opinion piece with that in mind. Nana is on a roll in this one.

To the narrator of this video, first of all, I do not know where you are getting your facts about the so-called down side of polygamy (polygyny = one man, many wives) and I feel that if you have statistics then you should present them.

Secondly, I am offended by your gross generalization of the so-called backwards African societies that practice polygamy. I am also offended that you think that women are so petty that they have no clue of what it means to build a nation, or that building a nation means having many children. These women are not that naive that they don't realize that nation building will take a long time with just one wife. To these people polygamy is not a matter of how much sex a man can have but how many children a man can help to produce and quite frankly getting pregnant does not require a lot of sex. It is the Western world with its suppression of the naked body that brought down shame on the indigenous people who were quite comfortable with their style of dress. Sexual implications based on what someone had on was not as overt as it has become in western hypocritically puritanical cultures.

If you want to point out backwardness of polygamous societies, then what about Saudi Arabia, The United Arab republic, Qatar, Sudan, Iran, India and others. These are predominately Islamic societies where Polygamy is practiced and they have booming cultures, technology and educational systems. None of which are "backwards" as you would define it.

I find your statement about African societies where polygamy occurs, and defined by you as backwards, to be quite disingenuous and falling way short of any valid study, survey or actual living in these cultures that you call backwards. The fact that you omit the ancient history of African Cultures, the Songhai Empire, the Mali Empire, the Great Kings and Queens who came out of Africa during ancient times and from a culture where polygamy was the norm shows the limit of your knowledge on this topic.

You fail to mention the impact of the European hypocritical influence on indigenous African culture and the imposition of hypocritical Western ideologies upon the African experience. You even fail to mention the irony of these so called Christians whose early prophets were all polygamous.

Your protestations are ill-founded even to this day when you do not understand the mechanism of the customs and culture of the society where polygamy is intrinsic to it. The in-fighting that you speak of hardly had to do with who was married to whom, and particularly, since natural selection had more women than men being in the world, then it is most advantageous for the women to be absorbed into a household or family unit, rather than having them left out.

And what if the wife is barren through no fault of her own, should her husband go with out having a progeny because his only wife cannot bare him children?

In strong societies where polygamy is the norm, many customs support it and encourage the family unit to work as a whole. The women and children are seen as resources and they help to build the community, take care of the children, teach and pass on the customs. The women are as industrious as the men and have markets, stores, farms and trading that increases the wealth of the family unit and community.

When many of the wars and strife were started, believe me, it was not over woman and who had the best looking women or pick of the crop. It was over resources, land, politics and hegemony. It was the male desire to fight and conquer his competition which quite frankly, was not another woman but what her husband had. Wars are socio-economical-political ventures that take place between warring tribes all over the planet. And it is modern society with its monogamy that has had the absolute worse wars of aggression against each other while you, and many others, consider Western society civilized.

I find your entire video disingenuous, insulting, linear in its presentation, and absent of the true facts and/or understanding of indigenous cultures and the how and why they participate in polygamy.

If you believe it is not a viable option for Western men and women, I have to agree because the culture is not designed to support that type of marital relationship. Western cultures are selfish, self-centered, narcissistic and pathological. They have abandoned the extended family for the nuclear one and have isolated themselves through individualism and personal ownership, thus creating a cesspool of fear, insecurity, paranoia, co-dependency and toxic relationships which according to the latest statistics, leads to 50% of marriages end in divorce.

There are a vast array of issues, concepts, nuances of indigenous cultures that you have blatantly ignored, therefore your conclusions, based on YOUR FACTS, can only be skewed and distorted. Western cultures create laws and regulations to manage their societies thus forcing people into unnatural relationship roles that sour, end, and foster mental health issues for all involved.

You do have the right to your opinion, but I think that if you are going to take on a subject such as polygamy, you either need to do better research or refrain from stating that cultures who practice it are backwards because that is patently incorrect, Sir.

ADDENDUM: The most ironic thing of all is that those countries that prohibit multiple spouses will punish the participants with jail time, a fine or both. That is to say, that it is criminal to have more than one spouse in some countries. How is that even a criminal offense? Who are you hurting when all parties agree? Civilization at its finest.

Polygamy In Africa

Polygyny and polyandry around the world[edit]
In most of the following examples, polygamy only refers to polygyny. Except when polyandry is explicitly stated, either all kinds of polygamy are forbidden, or the only allowed form of polygamy is polygyny.
Mayotte: Considered to be de facto illegal since a referendum sponsored by France in March 2009, forcing the island to comply with the French laws.[19][20]However, pre-existing Muslim marriages are currently still valid.
Benin: Benin recognized polygamous marriages until 2004 when they were constitutionally outlawed. However, pre-existing marriages are currently still valid in Benin.[21]
Burkina Faso: Both Muslims and non-Muslims can join in polygamous unions under Burkina Faso law.
Côte d'Ivoire: Akin to the situation in Benin, polygamy and such marriages were outlawed, though previous marriages are still recognized.[22]
Gabon: Both men and women can join in polygamous unions with the other gender under Gabonese law, although in practice only men do.
Ghana: Illegal under civil law, but recognized under customary law and Sharia law.
Nigeria: Recognized in all northern sharia states, federal law recognizes polygamous unions under customary law.
South Africa: Legal under customary law, and recognized for civil purposes in terms of the Recognition of Customary Marriages Act.
Kenya: Polygyny legal under legislation passed in 2014.[23]

Monday, January 25, 2016


Major Tillery
First Amendment Lawsuit Against Retaliation For Fighting for Medical Treatment For Mumia Abu-Jamal and All Prisoners


Major Tillery filed a civil rights lawsuit pro se against John Wetzel, Secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections (DOC), SCI Mahanoy Superintendent John Kerestes, SCI Frackville Superintendent Brenda Tritt and 17 other prison officials. The DOC punished and retaliated against Tillery for acts of solidarity with Mumia Abu-Jamal and other prisoners fighting for the fundamental human right of medical care.

The lawsuit was filed in the Schuylkill County Court of Common Please on January 5, 2015:
This is a civil rights action brought by Major George Tillery, a 65 year-old African-American man to stop and remedy retaliation against him for his exercise of his First Amendment Rights. Tillery was subjected to numerous retaliatory acts by the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections and its employees, including medical neglect and medical mistreatment, unjustified cell searches, transfer to another cell block, loss of his prison job and precipitous transfer from SCI Mahanoy to SCI Frackville and then being set-up with a false misconduct and given over four months in disciplinary custody (solitary confinement).

This retaliation was intended to punish and stop Tillery from filing grievances challenging medical neglect and mistreatment of him and other prisoners, including the well-known journalist and former death row prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal. This retaliation was punishment for Tillery continuing to publicly advocate for Mumia Abu-Jamal, and to publicly expose the DOC’s neglect and mistreatment of prisoner’s medical problems as well as the DOC’s retaliation against Tillery; and continuing to file grievances objecting to these retaliatory actions by prison officials.

Throughout his over thirty years in prison serving a sentence of life without parole, Tillery has challenged his conviction and sentence, and unconstitutional restrictions on access to courts, prison conditions including security classification and placement procedures, medical treatment, and housing conditions on behalf of himself and other prisoners.  He was held in solitary confinement in super-max institutions in the federal and Pennsylvania prison systems for over twenty of those years.

Tillery was the lead plaintiff in Tillery v. Owens, a class action lawsuit filed July 23, 1987, challenging the constitutionality of the conditions of confinement at the State Correctional Institution at Pittsburgh ("SCIP") located in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. It started as a pro se legal action by Tillery. It resulted in an historic legal order requiring remediation of unconstitutional prison conditions including deficient security, fire protection, access to the courts, over-crowded housing, medical care, mental health care and dental services. The DOC was required to make prison renovations costing more than a million dollars. See Tillery v. Owens, 719 F.Supp. 1256 (W.D.Pa.1989).

Major Tillery demands that the DOC stop its retaliation, remove the false misconduct from his record, provide medical treatment and transfer him out of SCI Frackville to a different prison in eastern Pennsylvania so he remains near his family.

This lawsuit is just part of Major Tillery’s fight for medical care and to protect himself and other prisoners who are standing up for justice. He has liver disease and chronic Hepatitis C that the DOC has known about for over a decade. Tillery is filing grievances against the prison and its medical staff to get the new antiviral medicine. This is part of the larger struggle to obtain Hep C treatment for the 10,000 prisoners in Pennsylvania and the estimated 700,000 prisoners nationally who have Hepatitis-C and could be cured.
Major Tillery, his daughter, Kamillah
and his two granddaughters.

Major Tillery’s daughter, Kamilah Iddeen appeals for our support:

It is so important that my Dad filed this lawsuit– it shows what really goes on inside the prison. Prison officials act as if my father is their property, that his family doesn’t exist, that he isn’t a man with people who love him. They lied to us every time we called and said he needed treatment. They lied and said he hadn’t told them, that he hadn’t filed grievances. The DOC plays mind games and punishes prisoners who stand up for themselves and for others. But my Dad won’t be broken.

The DOC needs to learn they can’t do this to a prisoner and his family. Justice has to be done. Justice has to be served. Please help.

Call prison officials and demand:
  • Demand decent medical care for Major Tillery!
  • Stop the Retaliation Against Major Tillery. He should be exonerated for the false charges of drug possession and this misconduct removed from his record.
  • Transfer Major Tillery from SCI Frackville back to SCI Mahanoy or to another facility in eastern Pennsylvania to remain near his family.
Dept. Of Corrections Secretary
John Wetzel (717) 728-4109 
Superintendent SCI Frackville
Brenda Tritt (570) 874-4516

Write to
Major Tillery AM 9786
SCI Frackville
1111 Altamont Blvd.
Frackville, PA 17931

For More Information, Go To: Justice4MajorTillery/blogspot
Rachel Wolkenstein, Esq. (917) 689-4009, RachelWolkenstein@gmail.com

Contribute: Go to JPay.com; code: Major Tillery AM 9786 PADOC

Wednesday, January 20, 2016

Ask Nana: "Should I Stay In An Abusive Marriage With My Children's Mother"

"Should I Stay In An Abusive Marriage With My Children's Mother"

NB Commentary: Great video and great advice. Kudos to Lenon Honor and his wife, Aida.  I can confer as a Mental Health Professional for many years and also from my own experience. One thing that is missing in this presentation is the focus on the female in this relationship. Why is she so angry? Of course he obviously does not know or cannot see what it is that has made her so angry, but it could be a number of things. She may have come from a very angry household and he may have come from an abusive household which we all know, one sickness feeds the other.


But even on a deeper level, how many people take the time to notice what childbirth does to the female, mentally, emotionally, spiritually and physically? It seems from what has been mentioned here that she has had a succession of childbirths, one after the other. Why? Religion? Family pressures? Economics? What and why did she have 4 children in such a short time span? Could she possibly be overwhelmed with the amount of work that it took and continues to take to care for the everyday needs of her children? How much help does he offer to make this a lighter burden? Are they able to get assistance from family/friends or maybe a nanny from time to time?

What I am pointing to is all too often people jump into marriages and have children when they were not prepared for marriage what it means to be a marriage partner and much less prepared for the day to day routine of childrearing and I mean healthy creative childrearing where two partners, family and even friends agree. How often do we find ourselves isolated due to the questions around how we are rearing our children? How often do family, friends, co-workers, and even associates question and judge the way we rear our children? What if there is a chasm in the way these two individuals parent within the household.

Women need to take more control over their lives and their bodies. Being a baby machine does not offer the comfort, security, peace and support that is portrayed by the high rollers and celebrities. Without support from a caring and nurturing family, friends etc. a woman can feel so isolated and alone. She may even be angry with and at her situation that she has all these children and little support.

Women need to take time to get to know what their strengths and weaknesses are before they even get married, as well as know what a healthy relationship looks like and what healthy creative parenting looks like. There are so many nuances to this story and the man who wrote this letter to you sounds like a classic victim. But victims are often passive aggressive and that is how they fight back when they are feeling victimized and/or dominated by the other person in the relationship.

Again, I have to go back to how pregnancy changes a woman in every way, and each pregnancy brings new and sometimes strange changes. She never goes back to being her old self, or the self she knew before she had the children. She may lose weight or even fit back into her clothing, but really and truly, she changes. So the question of "what changed" may be that "she changed" and that she changed more and more after each pregnancy. If she did not have the mental, spiritual, emotional and physical support to help her understand her changes then it is most probably that she wrap that "neglect" into anger and began to do what she knew how and that was lash out. She sounds like she is very, very angry. She is angry with her own life. She may have been living a lie for far too long. She wants out but then what? What man is going to marry her with 4 children? She may feel so lost, isolated, devastated, out of control, out of touch with her reality, deeply saddened and hurt that she is in her predicament, that all she can do is lash out to gain some control over her situation.

This sounds like a very convoluted situation with more nuances than I am sure, this young man can address or even fathom. It is a long unaddressed situation that has spiraled to the point where no one is hearing anyone, everyone is desperate, needy, hurt, overwhelmed and out of alignment on so many levels. With that being said, saving the marriage may be the least of their worries, saving their individual beigness may be an even bigger challenge, but one that needs to be addressed so that they can move forward as healthy human beings. Because like second hand smoke can be just as deadly, so can second hand toxicity stemming from past unresolved relationships can lead to a string of hurtful, unhealthy relationships for both in the future.

My suggestions.......


WTF? White Man Gets Off Easy After Admitting To Choking His Black Wife To Death

WTF? White Man Gets Off Easy After Admitting To Choking His Black Wife To Death

NB Commentary: Hmm, he got 31 years... I guess you could call that easy if you ain't going to jail. And you definitely don't know about jail house justice when it comes to killing women, rapists and pedophiles.

He probably plea bargained so he wouldn't get life, but 31 years may as well be life. It could very well be about race, but for some reason, I don't get the sense it is. And at risk of sounding like an apologist, some stuff is just what it is. He plea bargained, he got his mom off end of story. Shit happens.

I often wonder why folks want to have someone killed because they killed someone, it never made any sense to me, neither does the death penalty. As for Erica's family, how is killing this dude gonna bring their daughter back? She may have really loved him. Do you think she would want her family to have him killed? He was obviously a drug addict and she was obviously co-dependent. Would it help her spirit to rest if they killed him?

To me capital punishment is barbaric. Whatever happened to rehabilitation? So now, the prison industrial complex has another slave laborer. Who really wins in this scenario?? 

Is It Because He Is White? White Man Gets Off Easy 

After Admitting To Choking His Black Wife To Death

A New Jersey man is getting off light after he admitted to prosecutors that he murdered his wife and then tried to dispose her body in the next state over.

While everyone was grieving beside Kyle Crosby, he knew that he has chocked her to death during a domestic dispute and then employed his mother to help him dispose of the body.

Kyle Crosby recently plead guilty to aggravated manslaughter for the 2014 death of his wife Erica Crippen.

Crosby sold his deceased wife’s clothes for drug money and his mother was involved in covering up the crime after the couple had a simple argument that turned deadly.

Crosby, of Mount Laurel, N.J., man has pleaded guilty to killing his wife last year on New Year’s Eve and later disposing of her body in a rural area in Maryland, the Burlington County Prosecutor’s Office announced Tuesday.

Kyle Crosby, 29, entered a guilty plea to aggravated manslaughter and Hindering Apprehension, ABC7 reported.

Crosby will serve a 31-year sentence in state prison.
According officials, Crosby admitted in court that on December 31, 2014, he fatally choked his wife, Erica Crippen, 26, inside their Mount Laurel home and later transported her body to Maryland.

Investigators found Crippen’s body March 17 along a rural road in Sykesville, Maryland. She had been missing since New Year’s Eve, and her body was discovered under some branches and brush. Prosecutors have said the body was wrapped in a blanket; her arms, legs and neck were bound with an electrical cord and duct tape was on her face and nose.

Crosby’s mother, Jo Crosby, 68, of Sicklerville, N.J., was indicted in April on one
count of Hindering Apprehension and one count of Tampering With or Fabricating Physical Evidence. But she is getting off clean.

After posting $12,500 bail and as part of the the plea agreement with Kyle Crosby, the charges against his mother will be dismissed at sentencing.

The question remains is: how does the murderous husband get off with manslaughter convictions and his mother, who was a felony accomplice after the fact, get off unscathed?

Thursday, January 14, 2016

The Laughable Idea that Cosby would Change the Stereotypes of Blacks if He Had a Network!

The Laughable Idea that Cosby would Change the Stereotypes of Blacks if He Had a Network!

by Nana Baakan  Jan. 14, 2016

Why do people think that if Bill Cosby had NBC that would make him more powerful. Come on Folks!! NBC????

Irritated Genie on Bill Cosby & NBC

What makes folks think that that is power? And what makes people think that if he got it and did all that stuff that folks think the Powers that Be don't want him to do, that he would be successful? A take down is a take down and they don't care what kind of Psuedo power you have. Besides, it's commerce... people really don't have a clue how this shithole works when it comes to fame, money, fame, money, politics, fame, money and corruption...

Even Ruppert Murdock has some running competition and he owns a bunch of media. Don't get it twisted folks. Cosby would have to be in a whole other league to be untouchable. Perhaps create his own TV Network? Perhaps, but buying NBC is so laughable and people keep saying this over and over.

His power days have long since been gone. And when he had it, that was the time to really do something for the Black Community.

If they really wanted to shake him down, they would have "allowed" the buy out and then expose him to the world, what better way to pull the rug out from under him.

Cosby said "No" to somebody, and that did not go over well. So they launched a well hidden campaign to defame him in the eyes of the masses. This campaign has been hidden for some time, and held on to, for just the right moment and then, boom to the moon!

 Okay, for the sake of argument, let's say that the conjecture that Cosby was gonna change the stereotypes of blacks in the media and that it was gonna make a big difference int he black community and that this difference was gonna scare white folks so much so they had to take Cosby down. Let's just say you might have a point.

Let's take a look at reality. If all it took was righteous examples of Black Folks in the media to change things around, how come there are hardly any, no where? Is everyone who comes up with the idea being threatened with a take down?
No, in fact Spike Lee did his fair share of changing that image and you see what happened to him right? I ain't just talking about what the elite did to him. I am talking about what Black Folks did to him.

Black folks support shows that are very stereotypical. They support the rap artists
that talk about bitches and hoes and gangsters and drugs. They watch BET and the TV shows. And the MEDIA knows that!! Black folks participate quite handsomely in their own demise.

Look at the food we eat, the music we listen to, the TV shows we watch. If there was no market for it, then it would not sell and they would have stopped portraying Black folks like that a long time ago.

So the idea that Cosby was gonna do ANYTHING is laughable, because Black folks would soon tire of a zillion Cosby Shows and Fat Alberts. And we have to face that fact. If it were not for Blacks spending their money on the things that destroy them, there would be no market for the stereotypes. Cosby would soon have to fold because nobody would be watching his boring, tired, unexciting network full of do-gooder black folks, going to college and having their own businesses, being respectful to each other and helping the homeless. GIVE ME A BREAK! That network would fold in 6 months for lack of advertisement sales and viewers. Let's be serious.

People wanna see muck, mire, debauchery, crime, punishment, illicit sex, scandal, corruption, etc. That is why it sells. Do you think Oprah is living high off the hog with her whining and crying Network?? Heck no, she don't care now cause she don't need the money!! LOL

Black folks need to stop being apologists for Cosby and open their eyes. It's a rabbit hole and it's way deeper than you think.

As far as the Media is concerned, Blacks have got to stop blaming the white man for their depictions of stereotypes! If you don't like it, don't buy it, don't buy their music, don't buy their fashion and cosmetic lines, don't support any artists who are not uplifting and liberating the Black community. Don't support businesses that do not support the Black community. Don't go to their institutions of learning and stay the hell out of their jails.

Blacks complain and complain about White Supremacy in one breath and support the Machine in the next. That is why the idea is laughable because the Machine knows that the majority of Black folks would not support a Network that wasn't catering to the lowest most defiled images of Black Folks, they know that and that is why they are rich because of it.

We really gotta wake up to what is happening and take responsibility for our actions and stop blaming the white man!

Tuesday, January 12, 2016

Bill Cosby, Hollyweird's Manchurian Candidate

Bill Cosby, Hollyweird's Manchurian Candidate

The Media gave us Bill Cosby, a relatively unknown comedian who reached meteoric stardom. They made Bill Cosby and gave him certain privileges that they would not give to any other Black man during the 60's & 70's and like Fred Sanford would tell us, if the white man is doing it than it must be right. Remember how he wouldn't go to a black dentist? Well, during that time we too were struggling if we could trust a Black professional "anything" over a white one. Once Cosby was sanctioned by "white America" then Black America felt it was safe to throw their support behind him.

What we miss out on is that it is a selection process. They chose Bill Cosby and the Media took it from there. He was allowed to do what no other Black Man in those times and even these to do. They gave him position and status in their circles, rubbing elbows (and whatever else) with "their women" and basically making him part of the in crowd. Couple that with the fact that he was a "clean comic" on stage, which was another part of the selection deal. He was a favorite of not only blacks but he WAS ACCEPTED BY WHITES!  So, we cannot compare him to any other Black Man by saying, because he was Black they would not have allowed him to do any of what he is accused of by white women. This little caveat is missed in the debate. It has a lot to do with we as a people and how we, especially during those times, aligned ourselves with those "Black Folks" that white folks approved of.

Now as before, there is a different atmosphere around our feelings about successful Black Folks, we don't need the sanction of the "White Man"  as much as we did in the past, but how trusting are we of a successful Black professional, unless the White man sanctions them? This is just another nuance of this whole situation and its impact on the Black community. When we go to the root, the actual history of this man and how he became a superstar, we can clearly see that it was part of an agenda. Was it a divide and conquer strategy, as we know there were other comedians, more like Black Market comedians who were NOT embraced by white audiences.

The question remains, what price did he have to pay to be 
Hollyweird's Manchurian Candidate?

Cosby took the bait, he agreed and that meant he had to do whatever they said. I am almost certain he was guaranteed millions and a pristine image in the public eye. News outlets and tabloids would not be allowed to defame him in anyway or suffer the consequences. They protected him from the peering eyes of the public and maintained, sustained and protected the illusion they created call Bill Cosby, the clean comic, who appeals to all audiences world wide.

His attempts to cover his tracks through philanthropic donations and support to the Black Colleges etc., was most definitely done by his wife, Camille, his business manager.  She was behind every single act of charity. Was that her effort to conceal his back-door deals and prop up his reputation keeping him squeaky clean in the eyes of the masses, but behind closed doors, anyone who knew him personally knew a very different guy? This is true.

Cosby's head is on the chopping block. He is no longer needed. His chip of protection has been removed. The White Establishment that propped him up have all pulled out their support and turned their backs on him abandoning any and all promises of protection. He has been thrown back into the pool of Black American opinion, that is, much to his dismay, an opinion that is shaped and manipulated by the powers that be. Cosby became a house nigger, to coin a phrase. He was allowed to be the Misses Playmate.  But once he completed his chores he was thrown back into the field with the rest of us along with all the shuckin' and jivin' he did to keep his house nigger status. 

A person who does not learn the lesson from his past history is bound to repeat the mistakes in his future. We must become more discerning as a people. We must support our own whether or not they get the stamp of approval from the "Wizard of OZ". We must prop up those genuine folks who are in all sincerity attempting to improve our station in life on this planet. We must rally around the sincere folks who are making changes that will benefit our youth and generations to come. We must stop looking at our people through the Willie Lynch lens and work with those who have shown their honest nature and work. We have so many others scientist, inventors, statesmen, philosophers, educators and performing artists who are deeply dedicated to the emancipation of our people and are not simply perpetrating a fraud hand crafted by the Elite Media Moguls.

Once we get there it will be very difficult for anyone to sully the image of these dedicated men and women.

Again, I say, the Media gave us "Cosby" and the "Media" has taken him away. We need to think about how duped we have been and continue to be by Mass Media and develop discernment, particularly when it appears that a White Supremacist culture has seemingly stepped beyond their racist inclinations in support of a person of color. In the final analysis, if we can identify this issue as racially motivated, we cannot in all honesty, see any of his meteoric success that has proceeded this current attack on Bill Cosby as any more than a part of a racially motivated agenda of power and control.


Saturday, January 9, 2016

77% of Two-Year-Olds Now Use Mobile Devices on a Daily Basis

77% of Two-Year-Olds Now Use Mobile Devices on a Daily Basis

NB Commentary: When raising my own family, I realized the danger of television, especially unsupervised. My children were only allowed to watch Channel 12 and during that time, most of the programming was educational. That was over 40 years ago. They grew up wanting to be like other children and have free access to Television. After a while, the battle that ensued required, I completely eliminate the TV from my home. To this day, I do not own one. However, if you were to enter the homes of any of my offspring, you will find their homes filled with televisions, some of them so large, you would think it was a movie screen.  And they have more than one! Those who have children not only allow them to watch TV but they all have media devices.

Today, these children not only have TV, media devices, cell phones, Xboxes, WII, they have facebook pages, instagram, twitter and YouTube channels. How do you monitor all these contraptions taking up the attention of our youth? How do you do it when you too are glued to one or all of them?

I don't have a television, but the amount of time I spend on my computer, internet, YouTube, social media surely does say a little bit about my transfer from TV to Internet where I can watch movies, documentaries, TV shows, etc along with my daily dose of news drama local and from around the world.

Being an independent entrepreneur I use my internet access and social media to promote my business but to be honest, I also spend a bit of time on the social media roller coaster ride.

What I do with my grands is use the internet for research, learning and expanding awareness. I guess we have to use the same tactic of making what appears to be disruptive, destructive and dumbing down to awaken our youth. We must monitor what they connect to while using these devices. We have the option of "child proofing" the devices so that they can only access "kid friendly" stuff. But these young people are so savvy with these gadgets that they can work around it. 

All too often I have found my 4 year old granddaughter hiding in a corner and looking at YouTube videos that are not the best thing for her to be watching. She's had her gadgets since she was under 2years of age and has become quite proficient in using them. She manages to get to sites and games that I have no idea how she did that and so quickly. Her older brother spent hours on Nick Jr. when he was 2 and 3 years old and that was 7 years ago. Technology has leaped so far ahead that now Nick Jr. is on the cell phone!

We are certainly moving like gangbusters into the age of the gadget, and our children are riding side saddle right with us. So many things that were used to educate our youth 30, 40 years ago have become obsolete, and they can even use the Internet to get their homeschool education! Imagine that! It went from being illegal to homeschool to now having cyber charter schools.

Toddlers may be at risk from technology, warn experts as new study shows use soars by diaper set

I watched my neighbors child from infancy to now about 2.5 years old and sure enough as she was climbing up the stairs to enter her home, she had one hand on the banister and the other was holding a cell phone. I shook my head and said to myself, with a houseful of older siblings it was just a matter of time before she would catch the bug!

I am not too sure if we are creating people who don't know how to interact in a social medium with physical contact as folks are playing video games, emailing, chatting and text messaging one another all day every day. But I do know there are some wolves out there who are willing and able to use the media to distort, corrupt, and damage innocent minds. And in that vain, we as parents must monitor their use of these gadgets and maybe force them to play outside.

I use the gadget for leverage when my grands are with me. Let's finish our homework, read, do some research, eat our vegetables, bake cookies, make dinner and then… we can get with the gadget. They balk and squawk and complain but at least they get to do something other than stare into those interactive flashing lights and moving objects that are mesmerizing, hypnotic and addictive.

There is no doubt that the pace of technological development we’ve seen in recent years has been both amazing, and frightening. It’s certainly made our lives easier, but no one can ignore the fact that these developments are happening faster than the human race can adapt to them. Predictably, this has spawned a widespread fear of technology in our culture.

These fears must be prolific. If they weren’t, then Hollywood would have never made a fortune on movie franchises like The Terminator and The Matrix, and TV shows like Battlestar Galactica. Clearly, there are plenty of people in our society who are deeply afraid of the direction that modern technology is lurching towards.

However, for all their bluster about robots and AI taking over the human race, I don’t think these people are seriously prepared to do anything about it. They may say that they’ll never submit to the comfort and convenience of technologies that dehumanize them, but to be perfectly honest, I think that many of them have already acquiesced.

In fact, when it comes to taking care of our children, the majority of the population is already outsourcing their child rearing responsibilities to the machines. We didn’t notice this development, because it didn’t arrive in the way that pop culture prepared us for. Rather than being brutally subjugated by robot overlords, we’ve been conquered by consumer electronics.

Recently, a study was conducted on over 300 kids between the age of 6 months and 4 years, living in a low-income neighborhood in Philadelphia. The study found that most parents now let their kids use mobile devices; often with the intent of keeping them preoccupied. With numbers like these, I’m sure that plenty of the technophobes in our midst are among them.

Overall, 97 per cent of the children, or 338 kids, had used a mobile device. The researchers gave falling costs, marketing strategies and subsidies by cellular service providers as possible contributing factors.

Other findings from the survey included:
  • About 44 per cent of children under age one used a mobile device on a daily basis to play games, watch videos or use apps. The percentage increased to 77 per cent in two-year-olds and plateaued after that.
  • One-quarter (28 per cent) of two-year-olds did not need any help navigating a mobile media device, and 61 per cent needed help sometimes.
  • Of parents surveyed who allowed their child to use a mobile device, 70 percent reported letting their children play with mobile devices to do chores, to keep the child calm in public places (65 per cent) or run errands (58 percent), and 28 per cent used a mobile device to put their children to sleep.

They also found that half of the children in the study had their own TVs, and three-quarters of them had their own personal mobile device. A third of the kids were found to be using more than one media device at the same time. So much for playing outside I guess.

We have to ask ourselves, is this really what we want? Do we want to foster an entire generation of kids who, rather than simply learning how to use technology, are literally raised by it? We all know by now that these devices aren’t very good for our well-being, just as we’ve known for decades that watching TV all day is bad for us. We know these devices are addictive, and we know that they can stunt the emotional and social development of children.


We’ve all seen the smartphone zombies walking around us with their faces buried in their gadgets, oblivious to the world around them. Do we really want to raise our progeny to be like that? Are we really going to plug them into technology before they’re ever aware of the consequences? (There’s a reason why Steve Jobs wouldn’t let his kids use the devices he pioneered.)

Yes, we are going to do just that, because our society’s obsession with convenience now trumps our fear of technology. We talk a big game, but at the end of the day most of us give up on fighting what we perceive to be inevitable. Most of us are going to let these devices take over our lives, and the lives of our children, because it’s so much easier than giving a damn. Until we see this generation grow up to be devoid of creativity, imagination, social skills, and emotional intelligence, we aren’t going to change our ways.

Joshua Krause is a reporter, writer and researcher at The Daily Sheeple. He was born and raised in the Bay Area and is a freelance writer and author. You can follow Joshua’s reports at Facebook or on his personal Twitter. Joshua’s website is Strange Danger. 

Tuesday, January 5, 2016

In Comparison, Bundy Ranch Supporters 2016 & MOVE Bombing 1985

NB Commentary: Let's Talk About the Difference Between Who is Considered a Patriot and Who is Considered a Terrorist.

While the MOVE Organization was not officially declared a Terrorist Organization they were indeed treated like they were Enemies of the State. I am from the area and was there when it happened.
The group was/is called MOVE. they were/are a back to nature group of Africans who leader's name was John Africa. They felt that the government was vile and used vile language to express their contempt for it.
On the other hand, they were mostly self sufficient, planted their own food and were vegetarians and wore dread locks.

A group of them moved onto Osage Ave., in West Philadelphia and built a fortress within the house because they had been threatened jailed and tortured by the police for their way of life. They claimed freedom of speech and continued to express their discontent with the government, local, national and global.

In 1978 they previously lived in an area of West Philly called Powelton Village
where a blockade was place upon them, no food or water was allowed to get to them and no one could interact with them or be arrested. This stand off ended with them firehousing the house till its collapse and the members were forced to leave. Delbert Africa was brutally beaten.

In 1985, the Philadelphia Police Department dropped a bomb on the house located on a city block of Osage Ave. There was a bunker on top of the house and the fortress was so well constructed that the police after firing multiple rounds could not penetrate the walls of their home. The next option was to drop a bomb, this bomb ignited a fire that cause the MOVE members to escape while others, women and children, died in the blaze. Because it was allowed to burn, the entire block succumbed to the fire and was destroyed, and the mostly homeowners, displaced and/or homeless.

 The city did a make-shift job rebuilding their homes but never could they return to those people the valuables and memories and momentums. Some of these people had lived on this block their whole lives and had grand children who visited them there. It was devastating to the neighborhood, who simply believed that by asking the city government to intervene that they would simply remove the occupants of the MOVE home and all would go back to normal. This blazing inferno could be seen for at least a mile radius. It turn a beautifully sculptured community neighborhood into a war zone.

Jason Osder spent ten years making Let the Fire Burn, a harrowing documentary account of the confrontation – and ensuing conflagration – between members of MOVE and the Philadelphia Police Department, resulting in the death of six adult members of the Afrocentric back-to-nature organization, and five children. Read more at  http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/entertainment/movies/MOVE-doc-gets-theatrical-distribution-Will-open-in-fall.html
The war against civilians is not a recent occurrence. However, it is demonstrated in a certain and accurate strategy of terror, control and manipulation and in many cases is racist at best and xenophobic at worse.

One thing that is certain, if they can drop a bomb on a residential area in the middle of a large city, no place is safe from the aggression of the militarized police. 

"I took a cab to the 6200 block of Osage Avenue this week, to the block where
the City of Philadelphia dropped a bomb on a rowhouse in 1985.  I had been at work that day, in my office which is also in West Philadelphia and I wanted to see for myself what the location looks like now.  While the driver waited, I walked up and down the sidewalks with my cellphone camera and my small Cannon PowerShoot A2500.  The street was narrower than I had imagined.   I was shocked by the townhouses that had been built to replace the homes destroyed in the bombing and fire.  At most they were a step off the ground.  No stairs to sit on, no porches.  Small areas for a chair or two are enclosed with black wrought iron fencing.  Many houses are boarded up.  Others appear occupied but look unfinished.   There are flowers and other signs of life where people are living.  I tried to be discrete as I took snapshots.  I failed.  A man came up from the western end of the block … grumbling.  He pointed out 6221, the location of the MOVE house; maybe he assumed that was what I was looking for.  I introduced myself to a woman sitting in front of her property.   She expressed mild dissatisfaction with visitors/voyeurs like me. She said that all she wants is for the city to fix up the vacant properties and allow the neighbors to live in peace.  Thirty years and the MOVE fiasco is not over yet for either of us." Source: https://www.law.upenn.edu/live/news/5657-collective-trauma-transitional-justice-and-two

Check out this information: 25 Years Ago: Philadelphia Police Bombs MOVE Headquarters Killing 11, Destroying 65 Homes

Remembering Philly’s infamous bomb-dropping, guns-blazing, child-murdering day.
BY MICHAEL COARD  |  MAY 12, 2015 AT 12:05 PM

In this May 1985 photo, scores of row houses burn in a fire in the west Philadelphia neighborhood. Police dropped a bomb on the militant group MOVE’s home on May 13, 1985 in an attempt to arrest members, leading to the burning of scores of homes in the neighborhood.

A version of this article was originally published in 2012.
On May 13, 1985 at 5:20 p.m., a blue and white Pennsylvania State Police helicopter took off from the command post’s flight pad at 63rd and Walnut, flew a few times over 6221 Osage Avenue, and then hovered 60 feet above the two-story house in the black, middle-class West Philadelphia neighborhood. Lt. Frank Powell, chief of Philadelphia’s bomb disposal unit, was holding a canvas bag containing a bomb consisting of two sticks of Tovex TR2 with C-4. After radioing firefighters on the ground and lighting the bomb’s 45-second fuse — and with the official approval of Mayor W. Wilson Goode and at the insistence of Police Commissioner Gregore Sambor — Powell tossed the bomb, at precisely 5:28 p.m., onto a bunker on the roof.

This was followed shortly thereafter by a loud explosion and then a large, bright orange ball of fire that reached 7,200 degrees Fahrenheit. That day, Powell, the mayor, the police commissioner, Fire Commissioner William Richmond, city Managing Director Leo Brooks, and numerous police officers committed, in the words of Philadelphia Special Investigation Commission (better known as the MOVE Commission) member Charles Bowser, a “criminally evil” act that led to the death of 11 human beings, including five completely innocent and defenseless children, the destruction of 61 homes, and the incineration of thousands of family photos, high school and college sweetheart love letters, heirloom jewelry, inscribed Bibles and Korans, and many other totally irreplaceable mementos.

Mr. Bowser, my mentor and the author of the powerful tell-all expose entitled Let the Bunker Burn, told me that five of the city’s most influential black political leaders met at the mayor’s home before dawn on May 13, 1985, in response to the mayor’s invitation and warning that “I’m going to make a move on the MOVE house … (this) morning.” This was in connection to what Goode described as complaints by Osage Avenue neighbors and outstanding arrest warrants. By the way, it should be noted that those same neighbors attempted to stop the police department’s siege of their community as soon as they realized what was developing. In fact, as the five influential black leaders watched the television broadcast of the military-like assault unfolding with shots and tear gas, two of them repeatedly urged the Mayor to call it off. In particular, City Council President Joseph Coleman, sitting at the Mayor’s kitchen table, told him the 500-strong police action was “excessive” and State Senator Hardy Williams, standing near the kitchen entrance, said “Why don’t they just back up and relax? Nobody’s going anywhere.”

MOVE: An Assault That Never Would Have Happened in the Northeast
More than 500 cops fired more than 10,000 rounds of ammunition in less than 90 minutes — in a middle-class, black neighborhood. WTF? No, let me say it: What the Fuck?! This was blatantly outrageous brutal racism. It never would have happened in the Northeast or in South Philly, even if the Hell’s Angels had kidnapped then-President Ronald Reagan. And everybody knows it.

The cops would have simply sent in a hostage negotiator. And if that didn’t work, they would have cut off access to electricity, water and food, and then waited the criminals out. And if that didn’t work, they would have sent in a professionally trained SWAT unit to storm that specific house with surgical precision. Goddamnit, even Osama’s house and neighborhood in Abbottabad weren’t firebombed. The mayor, police commissioner, fire commissioner, managing Director, and the cops — and especially the public — would not have approved, allowed or tolerated the burning down of a white neighborhood and the destruction of 61 white homes.
And don’t tell me some shit about the incineration of Osage not being racist simply because the mayor and the managing director were black. It’s the victims that make it racist! They were black. And they lived in a black neighborhood. Furthermore, Powell, the bomb-dropping cop, was white. Moreover, William Klein, the cop who made the bomb, was also white. As eloquently stated by Bowser, “Goode and Brooks did not shoot 10,000 bullets into that house. They did not put military explosives into the bomb. They did not decide to let the bunker burn. And they did not shoot at children trying to escape the fire. I know none of that would have happened in a white neighborhood and so do you.” That’s exactly why the MOVE Commission pointed out, in one of its final official comments, that none of this would have ever happened “had the MOVE house and its occupants been situated in a comparable white neighborhood.”

MOVE: The Making of the Bomb
Tovex TR2 was a commercial explosive invented in the 1960s as an option to dynamite, and its purpose was to dig trenches through rock in order to lay pipes. The “TR” is the abbreviation for trench, and the “2” refers to the second DuPont Company item in its trenching products. The company’s explosive products division was located a little more than a half hour from Philadelphia in Delaware. But not one fire or police department official ever cared enough to contact DuPont and ask what could happen if TR2 were used in a residential neighborhood. And that’s because they didn’t give a shit about black people. If they had asked, DuPont would have told them that it had been designed exclusively for, and had been used exclusively for, underground purposes. And the last time I checked, every black man, woman and child in the Osage community lived above-ground.

It gets worse. As horrifically explosive as TR2 was, Klein fired things up even more. Exercising his independent judgment, he decided that TR2 wouldn’t be strong enough to breach the bunker. So what did he do? He unilaterally placed a one-and-one-quarter-pound block of C-4 on top of the two sticks of Tovex — despite the fact that the U.S. Army in 1979 had ended distribution of C-4 to all local police departments throughout the country. But, as documented in an October 22, 1985, letter from a special agent who headed the FBI’s Philadelphia office, approximately 30 blocks of C-4 had been delivered to the city by an FBI agent without the city requesting it and as a proposed solution during discussions regarding an anticipated confrontation with MOVE. Wow! And the rest, as they say, is history — or better said, it’s Philly’s 9/11, but as our own city, state and federal governments’ inside job.

MOVE: The Scene of the Crime
If that’s worse, and it certainly is, here’s worst: The children, and some of the adults, were shot at or shot and killed by police as they were fleeing the flames and surrendering. Wow, again! The police covering the alley leading from the rear of the MOVE house had automatic weapons and shotguns. No one ever claimed that MOVE had automatic weapons or shotguns at the scene, and no automatic weapons or shotguns were found among the ashes. Police officer William Stewart, a 28-year veteran of the department and a firearms instructor at the academy, was asked by investigators, “Did you hear gunfire at this time,” meaning when people were fleeing the MOVE house from the alley in the rear. With his lawyer present, he responded “Oh yes, automatic fire.” And when asked about who was firing the weapons, he replied, “Police officers. All the stakeout officers were running into the alley. They all had Uzi machine guns.” Strangely, though, 16 days later, he told the MOVE Commission that he never heard any police gunfire in the alley.

Fire Department Lt. John Vaccarelli and fireman Joseph Murray, who were veterans of the Vietnam War and who were in the vicinity of that very same alley, said they did, in fact, hear automatic fire when the MOVE members were running away from the flames. In fact, Vaccarelli pointed out that he saw at least three MOVE members in the yard next to the alley. This was corroborated by police officer James D’Ulisse. So since these people were outside the property lines of the interior of the house itself, how is it that their bodies were later found inside those property lines among the charred rubble? Only the police (and no reporters or other civilians) had access to the sealed-off crime scene during and after the inferno. Hmmm ...

And why does the official report of the city’s own medical examiner provide proof from the autopsies of six of the 11 dead — namely, 7-year-old Tomasa, 9-year-old Delicia, 10-year-old Phil, 11-year-old Netta, 13-year-old Tree, and 25-year-old Rhonda — that they did not die inside from flame-fire but died outside from gun-fire? If, as the police later testified under oath, these victims died from the flames that exceeded 2,000 hellish degrees inside the house, why were Tomasa’s long locks still long? Why was Phil’s body not burned? Why was Netta still wearing her white blouse with red trim? Why were Tree’s pubic hair and blue jeans still intact? And why did Delicia’s body and Rhonda’s body have in them metal fragments consistent with shotgun pellets as noted by an FBI ballistician? You think maybe they were fatally hit when they all were being shot at while trying to run from the flames and surrender?

Even MOVE Commission Chairman William Brownstated, “I firmly believe that more people got out than Birdie and Ramona and that’s something that still nags at me. I believe that someone, someday will deliver a deathbed confession …” And the Commission itself noted in Finding Number 28 of its official report that “police gunfire in the rear alley prevented the escape from the fire of some occupants of the MOVE house.”
Also, consider this: Detective William Stevenson, who was assigned to take contemporaneous notes during the entire confrontation, wrote that Sgt. Donald Griffiths, a commander on the scene, “from stake-out is in the rear of Osage Avenue, 6221, and is pointing to an area that he states, ‘I dropped an adult male from the MOVE property who fired at me when the female and child escaped.’” And Battalion Chief John Skarbeck said he had overheard a police sergeant say, “something to the effect that 'I got one back there' or 'I shot one back there.'” But Sgt. Griffiths testified that he had been misquoted, that what he really had said was people had “dropped out of sight” at that particular time and place. Yeah. He actually said that. With a straight face, too.

The overkill police presence, the military-style assault, the malicious bombing, the callous burning, and the evil shooting at fleeing victims were not just “grossly negligent” and “unconscionable” as the MOVE Commission properly and officially noted in Findings Number 15 and 18. They were also murderous. And justice demands the prosecution of each perpetrator because there’s no statute of limitations for murder. If it were your family, your neighborhood, your home, your property, and your memories — even if it weren’t — wouldn’t you agree?

If you do agree, join Dr. Cornel WestAngela DavisChuck D of Public Enemy, Fred Hampton Jr., me, and hundreds of others by attending the daylong "Memorial and Empowerment" event beginning at 11 a.m. on May 13th at 62d and Osage — 30 years to the day after the bombing. For more info, call 215-307-3960.

Michael Coard's radio show, "The Radio Courtroom," airs at noon on Sundays and Wednesdays. It can be heard locally on WURD 900 AM and on the Internet at 900amwurd.com. Follow @MichaelCoard on Twitter.

"It’s the week of the 29th anniversary of the MOVE bombings, and for those who were in the middle of it and are still with us, the memories of those tragic events still linger all these years later. As the haunting story unfolds in Jason Osder‘s Let the Fire Burn, which premieres tonight on Independent Lens on PBS (check local listings), you may be curious as to what became of some of the people involved."