You know, back in the day, when televangelists were on TV, they talked about the Gospel of Jesus Christ. He was born, He lived, He died, He rose again, and is coming back. Romans 1:16 talks about the Gospel bringing change into the lives of people. They concluded their telecasts with a heartfelt appeal for someone to accept Jesus Christ as their personal Savior.

A lot of the “televangelism” today is about being inspired and motivated to go a whoring after things instead of considering the relationship with God the Father. They spend 1 minute, if any, making an appeal for salvation. Yet, they spend 10 minutes or more pushing their books and conferences.

I’ve said all that to say…when was the last time Prophetess Bynum has made an appeal for salvation? She is addressing the issue of domestic violence. She is addressing the physical, but what about the eternal? What about the soul? She is getting a lot of publicity, but what good is it when the appeal for salvation gets pushed aside for a personal agenda?

Biblically, we have been warned against judging others. However, we have been authorized to be fruit inspectors. Where is the fruit of salvation?

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at Colombia University

Columbia University's invitation to Iran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad not only shows the world the importance of free speech, but also demonstrates what free speech means.

This is a portion of his speech...

AHMADINEJAD: My dear friends and scholars, distinguished participants, science and wisdom can also be misused, a misuse caused by selfishness, corruption, material desires and material interests, as well as individual and group interests.

Material desires place humans against the realities of the world. Corrupted and dependent human beings resist acceptance of reality. And even if they do accept it, they do not obey it.

There are many scholars who are aware of the realities but do not accept them. Their selfishness does not allow them to accept those realities.

Do those who, in the course of human history, wage wars, not understand the reality that lives, properties, dignity, territories, and the rights of all human beings should be respected, or did they understand it but neither have faith in nor abide by it?

My dear friends, as long as the human heart is not free from hatred, envy, and selfishness, it does not abide by the truth, by the illumination of science and science itself.

Science is the light, and scientists must be pure and pious. If humanity achieves the highest level of physical and spiritual knowledge but its scholars and scientists are not pure, then this knowledge cannot serve the interests of humanity, and several events can ensue.

First, the wrongdoers reveal only a part of the reality, which is to their own benefit, and conceal the rest. As we have witnessed with respect to the scholars of the divine religions in the past, too, unfortunately, today, we see that certain researchers and scientists are still hiding the truth from the people.

Second, science, scientists, and scholars are misused for personal, group, or party interests. So, in today's world, bullying powers are misusing many scholars and scientists in different fields with the purpose of stripping nations of their wealth.

AHMADINEJAD: And they use all opportunities only for their own benefit.

For example, they deceive people by using scientific methods and tools. They, in fact, wish to justify their own wrongdoings, though. By creating nonexistent enemies, for example, and an insecure atmosphere, they try to control all in the name of combating insecurity and terrorism.

They even violate individual and social freedoms in their own nations under that pretext. They do not respect the privacy of their own people. They tap telephone calls and try to control their people. They create an insecure psychological atmosphere in order to justify their warmongering acts in different parts of the world.

As another example, by using precise scientific methods and planning, they begin their onslaught on the domestic cultures of nations, the cultures which are the result of thousands of years of interaction, creativity and artistic activities.

They try to eliminate these cultures in order to separate the people from their identity and cut their bonds with their own history and values. They prepare the ground for stripping people from their spiritual and material wealth by instilling in them feelings of intimidation, desire for imitation and (inaudible) submission to oppressive powers and disability.

Making nuclear, chemical and biological bombs and weapons of mass destruction is yet another result of the misuse of science and research by the big powers.

Okay, the President of Iran visits New York City to attend a United Nations function and the US media uses this as an excuse to rabidly push for a US war against that country.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s right to free speech was so threatening to Bush and Cheney that they had to deny him a visit to the site of the ruins of 9/11 to place a wreath in remembrance of those that died there. Why?

The truth is, the US government feared what he had to say, so they censured him by denying him access to the World Trade Center site. It was a simple as that. He did speak at Columbia University though, and The New York Times printed some of that transcript.

What is noticeable about the media reporting is how all the hysteria comes from the US Right Wing, the US government, and their corporate media lackeys. Ahmadinejad toned down and resisted from what would have been correct in labeling the US government as the main source of world terrorism. After all, this is the country that through the last decades has been responsible for killing millions of Iranians and Iraqis through its promotion of war in the Middle East.

That is not even to mention the deaths from US government terrorism that have racked Lebanon, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, and the Occupied Territories controlled by US backed Israel. Instead, Ahmadinejad spoke out for Peace, something that the US corporate media has a real problem doing.

The US media in contrast, has tried to churn up a surge to more war. We, The American People, have to learn how to read between the lines of our corporate media sources and resist their propaganda and its call for yet more bloodshed.

Enough is enough. We should understand by now that demonization of the leader of another country is usually the prelude to attacking it. 

Okay, I'm very behind on this article.

Cleary Gottlieb has a bad hair day - Talk about a Glamour don’t.
Vivia Chen The American LawyerAugust 27, 2007

It seemed like a nice frothy summer treat for some hardworking gals at a hard-driving law firm . . . the women lawyers group at Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton invited an editor from Glamour magazine. The topic: the dos and don’ts of corporate fashion.

First slide up: an African-American woman sporting an Afro. A real no-no, announced the Glamour editor to the 40 or so lawyers in the room. As for dreadlocks: How truly dreadful! The style maven said it was “shocking” that some people still think it “appropriate” to wear those hairstyles at the office. “No offense,” she sniffed, but those “political” hairstyles really have to go.

By the time the lights flicked back on, some Cleary lawyers — particularly the 10 or so African-American women in attendance — were in a state of disbelief. “It was like she was saying you shouldn’t go out with your natural hair, and if you do, you’re making a political statement,” says one African-American associate. “It showed a general cluelessness about black women and their hair.”

The episode also produced a “mixed reaction” along racial lines, says this associate. “Some [whites] didn’t understand what the big deal was … but all the black associates saw the controversy.”

Cleary Gottlieb’s managing partner, Mark Walker, who heard about the incident from some of the attendees, also saw trouble. Soon after the event, Walker issued an e-mail that denounced the hair commentary as “racially insensitive, inappropriate, and wrong.” Calling the beauty advice “appalling,” Walker says, “You don’t tell people that their physical appearance is unacceptable, when certain characteristics are associated with a racial group.” He asks, “What’s the alternative? Straighten or bleach your hair?”

As for the identity of the editor, neither Cleary Gottlieb nor Condé Nast Publications Inc. (publisher of Glamour) would say. Indeed, almost all of the half-dozen Glamour editors contacted for this story professed not to have ever set foot in a law firm. “Cleary what?” asked several.

And Walker says he has no idea whether the editor who sparked all this controversy is a well-known fashionista. Not that Walker would know, even if Anna Wintour herself crossed his path. “Who is she?” Walker asks. “I really don’t know people in the fashion industry.” (If you have to ask, she’s the editor of Vogue.)

So did the Glamour editor realize how many feathers she ruffled? Walker says that the speaker was “spoken to by one of the women partners” and that she sent an e-mail apology. “I assume she was oblivious; I doubt she’s racist,” says Walker. “She wasn’t thinking and said something hare-brained.”

is that hair-brained?

Knicks harassment trial gets even tawdrier

 

Sept. 19: Team executives step up to defend themselves in depositions, and may do more harm to their case than good. "On the Money’s" Lee Hawkins reports.

 

Click Video

 

Former Detroit Piston player and now New York Knick coach Isiah Thomas is on trial for sexual harassment. A former black female executive has testified against Isiah.

NEW YORK - A former New York Knicks executive at the center of a sexual harassment lawsuit repeatedly complained to a friend from work that coach Isiah Thomas had berated her with foul language, according to trial testimony Tuesday.

 

“What are your job responsibilities, you ... ho?” Thomas, with an obscenity added for emphasis, told former vice president Anucha Browne Sanders in 2004, according to the secondhand account of her friend, Jeffrey Nix.

 

Sanders is seeking $10 million in damages on her claim that she was fired because she accused Thomas of harassment. Thomas denies the allegations.

 

Ho? I guess Isiah's just keeping it real, huh?

After a Dec. 29, 2004 Knicks victory, Nix said he saw Thomas embrace Browne Sanders. She later told her friend that Thomas had stated: “I’m in love with you.”

 

On Monday, jurors watched a videotaped deposition in which a mild-mannered Thomas said: “I never cursed at Miss Sanders. ... Now have I ever used curse words around her, yes, but at her? No.”

 

On the tape, Thomas also said that he would find it more offensive if a white male called a black female a “bitch,” than if a black male used the same term when speaking to a black female.

 

What????? More offensive if that term is coming from a white male? So Isiah thinks it's okay for black men to call black women bitches? Why do some black men feel they have carte blanche to treat black women like dirt and call us every disrespectful name under the sun? Calling a black woman or any woman a bitch is offensive no matter who is saying it. Isiah and his thug mentality can go to hell and join D.L. Hughley while he's down there.