Friday, October 19, 2007

A Step up from Monkeys

This is one of the most painful problems facing Blacks around the world. The sad thing is I bet others of intellect and prominences feel this way but choose not to express it. I don't care about Don Imus, David Duke, John Wayne rednecks who barely live above the poverty line themselves. This I care about. I hate how a few white people justify their world dominance by demeaning our humanity, and make no mistake: to demean our intelligence is to demean our humanity.

Fury at DNA pioneer's theory: Africans are less intelligent than Westerners
Celebrated scientist attacked for race comments: "All our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours - whereas all the testing says not really"
By Cahal Milmo
Published: 17 October 2007

One of the world's most eminent scientists was embroiled in an extraordinary row last night after he claimed that black people were less intelligent than white people and the idea that "equal powers of reason" were shared across racial groups was a delusion.

James Watson, a Nobel Prize winner for his part in the unravelling of DNA who now runs one of America's leading scientific research institutions, drew widespread condemnation for comments he made ahead of his arrival in Britain today for a speaking tour at venues including the Science Museum in London.

The 79-year-old geneticist reopened the explosive debate about race and science in a newspaper interview in which he said Western policies towards African countries were wrongly based on an assumption that black people were as clever as their white counterparts when "testing" suggested the contrary. He claimed genes responsible for creating differences in human intelligence could be found within a decade.

The newly formed Equality and Human Rights Commission, successor to the Commission for Racial Equality, said it was studying Dr Watson's remarks " in full". Dr Watson told The Sunday Times that he was "inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa" because "all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours – whereas all the testing says not really". He said there was a natural desire that all human beings should be equal but "people who have to deal with black employees find this not true".

His views are also reflected in a book published next week, in which he writes: "There is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual capacities of peoples geographically separated in their evolution should prove to have evolved identically. Our wanting to reserve equal powers of reason as some universal heritage of humanity will not be enough to make it so."

The furore echoes the controversy created in the 1990s by The Bell Curve, a book co-authored by the American political scientist Charles Murray, which suggested differences in IQ were genetic and discussed the implications of a racial divide in intelligence. The work was heavily criticised across the world, in particular by leading scientists who described it as a work of " scientific racism".

Dr Watson arrives in Britain today for a speaking tour to publicise his latest book, Avoid Boring People: Lessons from a Life in Science. Among his first engagements is a speech to an audience at the Science Museum organised by the Dana Centre, which held a discussion last night on the history of scientific racism.

Critics of Dr Watson said there should be a robust response to his views across the spheres of politics and science. Keith Vaz, the Labour chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee, said: "It is sad to see a scientist of such achievement making such baseless, unscientific and extremely offensive comments. I am sure the scientific community will roundly reject what appear to be Dr Watson's personal prejudices.

"These comments serve as a reminder of the attitudes which can still exists at the highest professional levels."

The American scientist earned a place in the history of great scientific breakthroughs of the 20th century when he worked at the University of Cambridge in the 1950s and 1960s and formed part of the team which discovered the structure of DNA. He shared the 1962 Nobel Prize for medicine with his British colleague Francis Crick and New Zealand-born Maurice Wilkins.

But despite serving for 50 years as a director of the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory on Long Island, considered a world leader in research into cancer and genetics, Dr Watson has frequently courted controversy with some of his views on politics, sexuality and race. The respected journal Science wrote in 1990: "To many in the scientific community, Watson has long been something of a wild man, and his colleagues tend to hold their collective breath whenever he veers from the script."

In 1997, he told a British newspaper that a woman should have the right to abort her unborn child if tests could determine it would be homosexual. He later insisted he was talking about a "hypothetical" choice which could never be applied. He has also suggested a link between skin colour and sex drive, positing the theory that black people have higher libidos, and argued in favour of genetic screening and engineering on the basis that " stupidity" could one day be cured. He has claimed that beauty could be genetically manufactured, saying: "People say it would be terrible if we made all girls pretty. I think it would great."

The Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory said yesterday that Dr Watson could not be contacted to comment on his remarks.

Steven Rose, a professor of biological sciences at the Open University and a founder member of the Society for Social Responsibility in Science, said: " This is Watson at his most scandalous. He has said similar things about women before but I have never heard him get into this racist terrain. If he knew the literature in the subject he would know he was out of his depth scientifically, quite apart from socially and politically."

Anti-racism campaigners called for Dr Watson's remarks to be looked at in the context of racial hatred laws. A spokesman for the 1990 Trust, a black human rights group, said: "It is astonishing that a man of such distinction should make comments that seem to perpetuate racism in this way. It amounts to fuelling bigotry and we would like it to be looked at for grounds of legal complaint."

What do you guys think about this article?

Guys,

This is courtesy of Ed. He didn't give me his opinion of it yet, i'm glad he's saving it, so what is yours?

NFL truth: Hip-hop culture hurting NFL
Jason Whitlock / FOXSports.com
Posted: 1 hour ago

You get one NFL Truth today. Watching Chad Johnson and Larry Johnson undermine their respective head coaches, Marvin Lewis and Herm Edwards, on Sunday gave me a singular focus, forced me to contemplate an uncomfortable truth.
African-American football players caught up in the rebellion and buffoonery of hip hop culture have given NFL owners and coaches a justifiable reason to whiten their rosters. That will be the legacy left by Chad, Larry and Tank Johnson, Pacman Jones, Terrell Owens, Michael Vick and all the other football bojanglers.
In terms of opportunity for American-born black athletes, they're going to leave the game in far worse shape than they found it.

It's already starting to happen. A little-publicized fact is that the Colts and the Patriots — the league's model franchises — are two of the whitest teams in the NFL. If you count rookie receiver Anthony Gonzalez, the Colts opened the season with an NFL-high 24 white players on their 53-man roster. Toss in linebacker Naivote Taulawakeiaho "Freddie" Keiaho and 47 percent of Tony Dungy's defending Super Bowl-champion roster is non-African-American. Bill Belichick's Patriots are nearly as white, boasting a 23-man non-African-American roster, counting linebacker Tiaina "Junior" Seau and backup quarterback Matt Gutierrez.


For some reason, these facts are being ignored by the mainstream media. Could you imagine what would be written and discussed by the media if the Yankees and the Red Sox were chasing World Series titles with 11 African-Americans on their 25-man rosters (45 percent)?

We would be inundated with information and analysis on the social significance. Well, trust me, what is happening with the roster of the Patriots and the Colts and with Roger Goodell's disciplinary crackdown are all socially significant.

Hip hop athletes are being rejected because they're not good for business and, most important, because they don't contribute to a consistent winning environment. Herm Edwards said it best: You play to win the game.

I'm sure when we look up 10 years from now and 50 percent — rather than 70 percent — of NFL rosters are African-American, some Al Sharpton wannabe is going to blame the decline on a white-racist plot.

That bogus charge will ignore our role in our football demise. We are in the process of mishandling the opportunity and freedom earned for us by Jim Brown, Walter Payton, Doug Williams, Mike Singletary, Gale Sayers, Willie Lanier and countless others. And those of us in the media who have rationalized, minimized and racialized every misstep by Vick, Pacman and T.O. have played an equal role in blowing it.


By failing to confront and annihilate the abhorrent cultural norms we have allowed to grab our youth, we have in the grand American scheme sentenced many of them to hell on earth (incarceration), and in the sports/entertainment world we've left them to define us as unreliable, selfish and buffoonish.

I take you to Arrowhead Stadium this past Sunday when two competent and respected black head coaches led the Chiefs and the Bengals in battle, and their efforts were periodically sabotaged by Chad and Larry Johnson, the two players Lewis and Edwards have defended the most.

Football fans are aware of Lewis' love affair with Chad Johnson, the Flavor Flav of the gridiron. Johnson's insistence on conducting a minstrel show during games has long been reluctantly tolerated by Lewis. Johnson, I guess, is just too talented, productive and well-compensated for Lewis to discipline. So Lewis has chosen to enable, going as far as making excuses when Johnson's selfish behavior extended to an alleged locker-room shoving match with coaches (including a swing at Lewis) at halftime of the Bengals' Jan. 8, 2006 playoff loss to the Steelers.

Coming off an 11-5 regular season and having been crowned the toast of Cincinnati, Lewis responded to that Johnson meltdown by vowing to cut the player who leaked the fight information to the media.

Since then, the Bengals have been one of the league's biggest disappointments, finishing 8-8 last season and starting 1-4 this season. Injuries have played a significant role in Cincy's troubles, but so has a lack of on- and off-field discipline and focus. Lewis' coddling of Chad Johnson has destroyed the chemistry that made the Bengals a playoff team in 2005.

On Sunday, with the Bengals trying to rally out of a two-score deficit, Johnson failed to finish a pass route, which contributed to Carson Palmer throwing an interception.

Not to be outdone, Larry Johnson continued his season-long pattern of immature behavior, spiking the football in frustration with 4 minutes to play and the Chiefs attempting to run out the clock. The Bengals were out of timeouts and the spike stopped the clock, giving Cincy one last chance to make a comeback.


Johnson, despite receiving a new $45-million contract, has brooded, pouted and complained all season. He spent the off-season promising to be a leader and has spent the first six weeks of the season spreading locker-room cancer. Edwards-coached teams have traditionally been the least-penalized squads in the NFL. This year's Chiefs are one of the most-penalized squads. Nickel back Benny Sapp drew an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty on Sunday, had to be dragged off the field by Donnie Edwards, and was spotted on the sideline arguing with players and coaches.

Race is not the determining factor when it comes to having a good or bad attitude. Culture is.

Hip hop is the dominant culture for black youth. In general, music, especially hip hop music, is rebellious for no good reason other than to make money. Rappers and rockers are not trying to fix problems. They create problems for attention.

That philosophy, attitude and behavior go against everything football coaches stand for. They're in a constant battle to squash rebellion, dissent and second opinions from their players.

You know why Muhammad Ali is/was an icon? Because he rebelled against something meaningful and because he excelled in an individual sport. His rebellion didn't interfere with winning. Jim Brown, Bill Russell, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, etc. rebelled with dignity and purpose.

What we're witnessing today are purposeless, selfish acts of buffoonery. Sensible people have grown tired of it. Football people are recognizing it doesn't contribute to a winning environment.

Whether calculated or not, the Patriots and the Colts have created settings in which Brady and Manning can lead and feel comfortable. I remember back in the 1980s when some black sports fans accused the Celtics of being racist for having a predominantly-white roster when Larry Bird was the star. No one remembered that Red Auerbach occasionally fielded an all-black starting lineup during Bill Russell's heyday.

My point is that it makes sense to cater to your stars. And it makes even more sense to fill your roster with players who don't mind being led, even if you sacrifice a little 40-yard dash speed.

If things don't change quickly, we're going to learn this lesson the hard way.

Friday, October 5, 2007

What the hell happened Yankees?

So I was about to jump off the roof when...

Ok, it wasn't that bad. Ok, it WAS that bad. Game 1 went about as bad as it could go. Wang got bombed and the offense let Sabathia off the hook last night when they had him in trouble in the first. Pettite is going tonight and I would bet money (Zac?) that he will pitch very well tonight and the Yankees will tie it up at one game a piece.

The thing that upset me is that Wang threw too many breaking pitches. It's like Ed has said so many times, you don't want to change what got you there. There being the playoffs and winning 19 games. The guy throws 94 mph sinkers and makes you hit it into the ground. Why change that? Supposedly the Indians are a good fastball hitting team. So what? It seemed like every hard hit ball off Wang - and yes there were plenty - were off breaking balls last night. That's not his strength. Bad gameplan. As for Sabathia, the guy is throwing harder than ever. He looked good when he wasn't missing the strike zone.

The big worries for me are Clemens going in game 3 now. The guy hasn't pitched in 3 weeks. I'm very worried. I wouldn't have been as worried had Wang won. You could almost experiment with Clemens going in Game 3, but now? I would rather see Hughes or Ian Kennedy. 5 Game series' are tough. Since the Indians are such a good fastball hitting team we're definitely going to win Mussina's start. The guy hasn't thrown a fastball in 2 years.

Monday, October 1, 2007

The Mets: Where do they go from here?

Met fans, I am truly sorry for the way the season ended for you. Honestly. I did not take any delight in your sorrow this weekend, which I know must be considerable. As a Yankee fan, I know about collapses. I heard a lot about it from you all after the Yanks were beaten by the Sawx taking four straight from the Yanks after being down 3-0. That being said, the Mets are fixable. They have the resources to do it. This season may end up being kind of good for the Mets. I stated last season that this team hadn't faced adversity which was why I wasn't sure about them reachign the Series last year. This year, they finally faced adversity, and while they didn't pass this test, at least now they faced it. They can learn from this. I don't think that this is the way they're doomed to face adversity their whole careers. I do think it was troubling the way that Reyes played over the last 6 weeks of the season, but I don't think it's something we should come to expect from him on a year-in, year-out basis.

I stated from the beginning of the year that it was short-sighted and irresponsible of the Mets to have such old players at key positions when you have aspirations of winning it all. If they weren't expected to make a serious run at the World Series, then going into the season depending on: El Duque (41 and injury prone), Glavine(41), Jose Valentin(37, coming off a career year), Moises Alou (41 and injury prone)and Shawn Green(34 and injury prone). Maybe the thought process was that with 2 injury prone, older, corner outfielders that Lastings Milledge would get the opportunity to play, but thats asking for too much to go right if you have championship aspirations. Then there is the case of Paul LoDuca. I like him for the most part. He is good defensively and calls a relatively good game. He was another Met that had a career year last year that could not be called on to perform as well as he did. He will be 35 next year and as long as his contract is not too large, he should be re-signed as a stop gap until another catcher comes along. Word is that the Mets will be making a big play for Posada this off season. Getting Posada would be huge for the Mets, but they would probably have to overpay for him to come to Shea.

I'm not sure what outfielders are going to be free agents this coming off season, but the time is probably now for them to trade Lastings Milledge to acquire a young starter. Maybe the Mets should start talks with Billy Beane who seems to love Milledge and get Danny Haren who may obtainable now that Haren is - I think - arbitration eligible. Beane is notorious for trading guys away at this stage in their careers. It is easier and cheaper to get corner outfileders with some power than it is to get starting pitching. If you pick up a decent - not injury prone - outfielder this off-season, give Endy Chavez/Ramon Castro about 300-400 AB's next year for his speed and defense, I think they'll be all right.

What I find troubling is that Wagner is trying to blame Randolph and Rick Peterson for how bad they pitched over the last month or 2. Were they overworked? Sure. But that had more to do with the fact that their starters couldn't go longer in games. They really missed one of Izzy's favorites in Darren Oliver. He could go - as Iz pointed out - up to 4 innings by himself. They really missed him for his ability to eat innings in the middle of games. Plus, they still haven't found a replacement for Duaner Sanchez. He's starting to become the Mets' version of Carl Pavano. Getting Sanchez back should be a huge boost for the Mets next season. I don't think that the Mets' bullpen will need an overhaul. If they are able to obtain a couple of innings eaters, they should be fine. Unfortunately, thats easier said than done. Maybe they can go for Dontrelle Willis. They'll most likely be able to get him on the cheap and if Willis gets to a team with a chance to win, maybe he'll pitch better. The only other question with him is his weird delivery which may put a lot of stress on his elbow which should worry you if you want him for the long haul.

What do you guys think? Any ideas on what went wrong and how to fix it?


KudoSurf Me!