SAN BERNARDINO Incorporating Ebonics into a new school policy that targets black students, the lowest-achieving group in the San Bernardino City Unified School District, may provide students a more well-rounded curriculum, said a local Socialistsociologist.
The goal of the district's policy is to improve black students' academic performance by keeping them interested in school. Compared with other racial groups in the district, black students go to college the least and have the most dropouts and suspensions.
Blacks make up the second largest racial group in the district, trailing Latinos.
A pilot of the policy, known as the Students Accumulating New Knowledge Optimizing Future Accomplishment Initiative, has been implemented at two city schools.
Mary Texeira, a Socialist sociology professor at Cal State San Bernardino, commended the San Bernardino Board of Education for approving the policy in June. as a feel good measure we can all use
Texeira suggested that including Ebonics in the program would be beneficial for students. How she didn't say> Ebonics, a dialect of American English that is spoken by many blacks throughout the country, was recognized as a separate language in 1996 by the Oakland school board. Oh Yeah...that's a resounding endorsement"Ebonics is a different language, it's not slang as many believe,' Texeira said. "For many of these students Ebonics is their language, and it should be considered a foreign language. Which UN delgation speaks this again? These students should be taught like other students who speak a foreign language.' because they'll need this for college...Er..um Berkeley anyway
Texeira said research has shown that students learn better when they fully comprehend the language they are being taught in. Here's a tip..learn English
"There are African Americans who do not agree with me. They say that (black students) are lazy and that they need to learn to talk,' Texeira said. Bill Cosby anyone?
Len Cooper, who is coordinating the pilot program at the two city schools, said San Bernardino district officials do not plan to incorporate Ebonics into the program.
"Because Ebonics can have a negative stigma, we're not focusing on that,' Cooper said. "We are affirming and recognizing Ebonics through supplemental reading books (for students).'
Beginning in the 2005-06 school year, teachers will receive training on black culture and customs. District curriculum will now include information on the historical, cultural and social impact of blacks in society. Although the program is aimed at black students, other students can choose to participate.
The pilot program at Rio Vista Elementary and King Middle schools focuses on second-, fourth- and seventh-grade classes. District officials hope to train teachers from other schools using the program as a model.
Board member Danny Tillman, who pushed for the policy, said that full implementation of the program at all schools may take years, but the pilot program is a beginning.
"At every step we will see positive results,' Tillman hoped said.
Tillman hoped the new policy would increase the number of black students going to college and participating in advanced courses. How many Physics or Law classes use Ebonics?
Teresa Parra, board vice president, said she worried the new program would have an adverse effect. You think?
"I'm afraid that now that we have this the Hispanic community, our largest population, will say, 'We want something for us.' Next we'll have the Asian community and the Jewish community (asking for their own programs). When will it end?'
Parra said the district should focus on helping all students who are at risk.
"I've always thought that we should provide students support based on their needs and not on their race,' Parra said.
Tillman disagreed with Parra, saying programs that help Latinos already exist in the district. He cited the district's English- as-a-second-language program. Spanish counts ..dumbass
Texeira urged people not be quick to judge the new program as socially exclusive. She said people need to be open to the program. Kum baya
"Everybody has prejudices, but we must all learn to control that behavior,' Texeira said. She said a child's self confidence is tied to his or her cultural identity. I'm an American...works for me
She compared the low performance of black students to starvation. "How can you be angry when you feed a family of starving children?'
Ratibu Jacocks, a member of the Westside Action Group, a coalition of black activists, said they are working with the district to ensure the policy is implemented appropriately.
"This isn't a feel-good policy. This is the real thing,' Jacocks said. Un Huh
Jacocks said he didn't believe the new policy would create animosity. He said he welcomed the idea of other ethnic groups pushing for their own programs.
"When you are doing what's right, others will follow,' Jacocks said. "We have led the way before the civil-rights movement opened the door for women's rights and other movements.'
Karl Rove? Please. I couldn't care less. This week finds me thousands of miles from the Beltway in what I believe the ABC World News Tonight map designates as the Rest Of The Planet, an obscure beat the media can't seem to spare a correspondent for. But even if I was with the rest of the navel-gazers inside the Beltway I wouldn't be interested in who ''leaked'' the name of CIA employee Valerie Plame to the press. As her weirdly self-obsesssed husband Joseph C. Wilson IV conceded on CNN the other day, she wasn't a ''clandestine officer'' and, indeed, hadn't been one for six years. So one can only ''leak'' her name in the sense that one can ''leak'' the name of the checkout clerk at Home Depot.
Back when Woodrow Wilson was running for president, he had a campaign song called ''Wilson, That's All.'' If only. With Joe Wilson, it's never all. He keeps coming back like a song. But in the real world there's only one scandal in this whole wretched business -- that the CIA, as part of its institutional obstruction of the administration, set up a pathetic ''fact-finding mission'' that would be considered a joke by any serious intelligence agency and compounded it by sending, at the behest of his wife, a shrill politically motivated poseur who, for the sake of 15 minutes' celebrity on the cable gabfest circuit, misled the nation about what he found.
This controversy began, you'll recall, because Wilson objected to a line in the president's State of the Union speech that British intelligence had discovered that Iraq had been trying to acquire ''yellowcake'' -- i.e., weaponized uranium -- from Africa. This assertion made Bush, in Wilson's incisive analysis, a ''liar'' and Cheney a ''lying sonofabitch.''
In fact, the only lying sonafabitch turned out to be Yellowcake Joe. Just about everybody on the face of the earth except Wilson, the White House press corps and the moveon.org crowd accepts that Saddam was indeed trying to acquire uranium from Africa. Don't take my word for it; it's the conclusion of the Senate intelligence report, Lord Butler's report in the United Kingdom, MI6, French intelligence, other European services -- and, come to that, the original CIA report based on Joe Wilson's own briefing to them. Why Yellowcake Joe then wrote an article for the New York Times misrepresenting what he'd been told by senior figures from Major Wanke's regime in Niger is known only to him.
As I wrote in this space a year ago, an ambassador, in Sir Henry Wootton's famous dictum, is a good man sent abroad to lie for his country; this ambassador came home to lie to his. What we have here is, in effect, the old standby plot of lame Hollywood conspiracy thrillers: rogue elements within the CIA attempting to destabilize the elected government. If the left's view of the world is now so insanely upside-down that that's the side they want to be on, good for them. But ''leaking'' the name of Wilson's wife and promoter within the CIA didn't ''endanger her life'' or ''compromise her mission.'' Au contraire, exposing the nature of this fraudulent, compromised mission might conceivably prevent the American people having their lives endangered.
Here's the thing: They're still pulling body parts from London's Tube tunnels. Too far away for you? No local angle? OK, how about this? Magdy el-Nashar. He's a 33-year old Egyptian arrested Friday morning in Cairo, and thought to be what they call a ''little emir'' -- i.e., the head honcho in the local terrorist cell, the one who fires up the suicide bombers. Until his timely disappearance, he was a biochemist studying at Leeds University and it's in his apartment the London bombs were made. Previously he was at North Carolina State University.
So this time round he blew up London rather than Washington. Next time, who knows? Who cares? Here's another fellow you don't read much about in America: Kamel Bourgass. He had a plan to unleash ricin in London. Fortunately, the cops got wind of that one and three months ago he was convicted and jailed. Just suppose, instead of the British police raiding Bourgass' apartment but missing el-Nashar's, it had been the other way around, and ricin had been released in aerosol form on the Tube.
Kamel Bourgass and Magdy el-Nashar are real people, not phantoms conjured by those lyin' sonsofbitches Bush and Cheney. And to those who say, "but that's why Iraq is a distraction from the war on terror," sorry, it doesn't work like that. It's not either/or; it's a string of connections: unlimited Saudi money, Westernized Islamist fanatics, supportive terrorist states, proliferating nuclear technology. One day it all comes together and there goes the neighborhood. Here's another story you may have missed this week:
''Iran will resume uranium enrichment if the European Union does not recognize its right to do so, two Iranian nuclear negotiators said in an interview published Tuesday.''
Got that? If you don't let us go nuclear, we'll go nuclear. Negotiate that, John Kerry. As with Bourgass and el-Nashar, Hossein Moussavian and Cyrus Nasseri are real Iranian negotiators, not merely the deranged war fantasies of Bush and Cheney.
The British suicide bombers and the Iranian nuke demands are genuine crises. The Valerie Plame game is a pseudo-crisis. If you want to talk about Niger or CIA reform, fine. But if you seriously think the only important aspect of a politically motivated narcissist kook's drive-thru intelligence mission to a critical part of the world is the precise sequence of events by which some White House guy came to mention the kook's wife to some reporter, then you've departed the real world and you're frolicking on the wilder shores of Planet Zongo.
What's this really about? It's not difficult. A big chunk of the American elites have decided there is no war; it's all a racket got up by Bush and Cheney. And, even if there is a war somewhere or other, wherever it is, it's not where Bush says it is. Iraq is a ''distraction'' from Afghanistan -- and, if there were no Iraq, Afghanistan would be a distraction from Niger, and Niger's a distraction from Valerie Plame's next photo shoot for Vanity Fair.
The police have found the suicide bomber's head in the rubble of the London bus, and Iran is enriching uranium. The only distraction here is the pitiful parochialism of our political culture.
Posted by: Frank G ||
07/18/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The left in this country is going to have to wake up real soon or we're going to have to expel them along with all the Muslims. Both groups are traitors who hate this country and would do anything they could to injure it.
Posted by: mac ||
07/18/2005 5:43 Comments ||
Top||
#2
the CIA, as part of its institutional obstruction of the administration, set up a pathetic ''fact-finding mission'' that would be considered a joke by any serious intelligence agency and compounded it by sending, at the behest of his wife, a shrill politically motivated poseur who, for the sake of 15 minutes' celebrity on the cable gabfest circuit, misled the nation about what he found.
Pure demagoguery from beginning to end.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
07/18/2005 8:13 Comments ||
Top||
#3
you'd know demagoguery, wouldn't you, MS - How's that oil for "food" thing going? Still Kofi's buttboy? Or just pretending that whole sordid affair and your unending lip service to defend those corrupt assholes ...never happened? Why are you here, when you have zero credibility or admirers?
Posted by: Frank G ||
07/18/2005 8:23 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I don't normally comment on US domestic political issues, but I find this whole thing laughably petty. It's like a squabble over who licked the ice cream first. No crime occured and someone lied. BFD (and Steyn is right).
#5
The funny part is that the left firmly believes they are just one scandal away from taking back government. Everything to them is a scandal: WMDs, unguarded munitions, Body Armor, Unarmored HUMVEEs, Oil, National Guard, Abu Gharib, Gitmo, and Plame. The left spent an ENOURMOUS amount of time, money, and public trust throwing manure on these quasi-scandals in hopes that they would grow. They hope that that if just one of them had legs it would lead to a Republican downfall and they would retake the House, Senate, and White House. Problem is that they place themselves always on the opposite of the public interest. For example if they had found hand-written notes from Bush that described his experience of flying F105s while flying on pot in happened 30 odd years ago and who cares. And if they had a signed order from Rumsfield telling guard to stack prisoners in a pyramid, naked, and take pictures most Americans shed tears for the criminals and that goes double for the âGitmo Abuseâ non-scandal. Wilson has turned or twisted his story, excuse me âHas taken journalistic freedom, that he canât really been taken seriously. The good part is that he has taken a great many of the left down with him!
Jamaican-born Germaine Lindsay is presumed to be one of the London bombers. Let's loosen the wingnut for a moment and wonder? Does Lindsay have any connection to D.C. sniper Johnnie Malvo, also a young man from Jamaica?
The police have studiously avoided making the a connection between the two D.C. snipers and their religious faith, Islam. Just like, up until their arrests, the suspect was assumed to be a lonely white man. Damn fine police work.
Before I bolt down my wingnut hat again, let's just speculate. Two young Jamaican men, Moslems, murderers. Curious, that...
Everyone seems to be assuming that the London suicide bombers and suicide bombers in general are motivated by hate of the West and non-muslims, mixed in with despair at the situation that they personally and Muslims in general find themselves. The debate on causes, root and otherwise, is predicated on these assumed motivations. I say assumed because there is no real evidence to back these contentions and to be frank, they look to me like projection - the commentator is imagining what would be needed to drive him/herself to such acts.
A few years ago I was in the unsual position of observing groups of muslims and where I could ask myself 'What makes Muslims different?' The conclusions I came to lead me to think suicide bombers are motivated by something quite different and far more rational.
About 5 years ago I was hospitalized in the Singapore General Hospital for well over a month. I shared a room with three other patients (not always the same three). The unit I was in dealt with a condition that Malays are particularly prone to. So, most of the time, there was me, a Malay and a Chinese in the room. There are a few things you need to understand for this story to make sense.
Spend any time in hospital and you rapidly get extremely bored. I found I was watching Chinese historical dramas and Malay game shows (without subtitles), languages I don't understand.
While, Singaporeans have a reputation as abiders by rules, I have never in my entire life come across a set of rules so comprehensively ignored as the hospital visiting rules. Large groups of visitors would arrive any time of the day or night, some even stayed in the hospital room. A family of three camped in the room for over a week while the father was in the hospital bed.
You may think that being a Caucasian in Asia makes you stand out. In fact the opposite happens. You get ignored. Its like people edit you out of the scene.
Many years ago I studied psychology and I still retain the habit of observing how people behave in certain situations. The groups were always segregated by race. Only Malays visited a Malay and only Chinese visited a Chinese. All Malays in Singapore are Muslims and almost no Chinese are.
It was fairly normal to have a large group of Malays and a large group of Chinese in the room at the same time and how they behaved was strikingly different. The Chinese treated it like a social occasion, an opportunity to catch up with people and chat. They often brought food (for themselves not the patient) and their kids. The Malays by contrast were much more formal and functioned as a group where each knew their position and kept to it. There was none of the spontaneous social interaction of the Chinese.
So what has this got to do with suicide bombers? The conclusion I reached is there was a very strong sense of social order in Malay and hence Muslim societies (which other experiences has reinforced). Each person has a well defined role and expected contribution. The phrase that came to mind was 'social cohesion'. The group is valued more highly than the individual, unlike the Chinese who are much more like Westerners in valuing the individual. In such an environment the notion of sacrificing oneself for the group, becomes more natural (as the group is more important than the indivdual). So when I read statements about Islamic 'militants' 'defending Islam', I think that is their real motivation. They don't hate us, nor do they feel despair at their own situation. What they feel is threatened by us - our mores, ideas, entertainments and culture in general, and that threat is existential.
While we talk about cultural clash as a fairly abstract concept, to Muslims it's real and immediate. What they want most of all is to keep us away. The suicide bomber is sacrificing himself in order to protect the group by increasing the seperation from our society and its corruptive influence. Not only does this makes more sense to me than the hatred and despair thesis, it is also more rational because it is likely to work.
This analysis leads me to conclude that attempts to integrate and assimilate Muslims will result in more suicide bombing. Its not the answer, at least in the medium term. It also leads me to conclude that societies with large Muslim minorities have a serious intractable problem that can only be solved by physically removing them. This will require that the social problems from Muslim minorities will have to get a lot worse before the hurdle of forced relocation can be crossed.
This analysis leads me to conclude that attempts to integrate and assimilate Muslims will result in more suicide bombing. Its not the answer, at least in the medium term. It also leads me to conclude that societies with large Muslim minorities have a serious intractable problem that can only be solved by physically removing them.
Well, it seems to me that assimilation is the social tactic that Europe has not tried, and found wanting.
This will require that the social problems from Muslim minorities will have to get a lot worse before the hurdle of forced relocation can be crossed.
This sounds like a self-fulfilling prophecy if you ask me.
Bleah.
Posted by: Phil Fraering ||
07/18/2005 9:08 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Actually, I think it takes a whole chain of motivations to create a suicide bomber.
first, the potential bomber has to be a believer in a cause
second, the potential bomber has to believe that his/her own death will be a glorious stoke for that cause
third, the potential bomber needs emotional coersion (or at least support) from a cohort group - maybe they need role models too
#6
I think suicide bombers are the tip of a much bigger iceberg and whether a particular terrorist knows they are going to kill themselves or not is immaterial, since we know suicide bombers do exist. My point was that an awful lot of people are presumimg irrational motivations for these people and developing prescriptions based on these presumed motivations, which in my view will make the terrorism problem worse.
To a degree I agree with Phil F. that assimilation is the answer. What I am questioning is 'Are we prepared for what will happen on the road to get there?' Or 'Is it worth the pain of trying to assimilate a group that violently resists assimilation?'
In general, I'm an optimist and think for most problems there is at least one good solution. However, for unassimilated moslem minorities I think there is no good solution and the prescriptions proposed are based on a fundamental mis-understanding of the problem, and as a result the problem will get worse.
And finally, TechCentral had a good article a couple of weeks back about how people want to believe that there is always a solution and if a problem is not getting solved it's because evil people are thwarting the solution. Whereas the reality is some problems are difficult and intractable without a good solution.
#7
They caught one the other day, and he was high as a kite. In other cases, the bad guys have tricked mentally retarded individuals into carrying bombs. Don't discount the prevalence of coercion, by drugs and other means.
Posted by: Mike ||
07/18/2005 18:02 Comments ||
Top||
#8
There also is the widespread problem with male sexual identity, and sexual abuse aftermath, among the younger suicide bomber crowd. And there are issues stemming personal ego-centric motivations of personal "honor" in association with being "macho," attempts at reclaiming identity, (or of, essentially, being awarded a new one) that have little to do with "protecting" the larger social group, although they may pay lip service to that concept, and yes, some may believe they are doing that. Lack of education (in general) among suicide bombers and the clerics promising sexual fulfillment in Moslem paradise also has a lot to do with it.
#9
Phil, if your thesis were correct, then the parents of suicide bombers would have nothing but positive things to say. However, I've read several accounts of Palestinian parents who were outraged that their children were convinced/coerced to become suicide bombers. In these cases, either someone did not know their place or didn't give a damn.
#10
I've also seen reports that some parents are proud of their suicide bombing offspring. Certainly, large parts of some(?) muslim societies agree with the tactic.
#11
Lack of education (in general) among suicide bombers ... also has a lot to do with it.
That's patently false. There's a study floating around that states that something on the order of 4/5 of suicide bombers are college educated, most in the west (you can guess the conclusions drawn thereafter). That same study goes on to conclude that the profile of a typical homicidal jihadi bomber is: college educated (probably in the non-Muslim west), comes from a family & background that's not particularly religious, comes from a family that we'd consider middle class (wealthy or very wealthy by local standards), etc. These are not poor, hopeless, desperate, unwashed masses who've been misled by zealots, they're generally cold, rational, well-educated, folks living comfortable lives who make conscious decisions that they believe will further a cause they believe in very much. The old liberal canards of poverty and oppression just don't play here.
Another Episode in the War between Christendom and Islam
by Bruce Thornton
The slaughter in London is another grisly wake-up call that likely will go as unheeded as earlier ones. Already the standard narrative is being trotted out: evildoers created by what the New York Times predictably called the âroot causes of terrorismâ: autocracy, or economic stagnation, or Palestinian suffering, or globalization's dislocations, or Western historical sins, or the war in Iraq (the cause will depend on the political prejudices of the pundit) have âhijackedâ Islam and distorted its peaceful message. And now they are using Islam to justify murder in order to further their own ambitions or dysfunctional psychic needs. Given this explanation, so the story goes, we must be careful not to demonize all Muslims and assure them that we respect their religion and culture. The tale is then wrapped up with fierce threats against the terrorists and protestations of admiration for Islam.
Believing this delusion requires that one ignores fourteen centuries of Islamic jihad against the West, a war of conquest and colonization ratified by centuries of Islamic theology and jurisprudence. Indeed, what we call Islamic radicals are in fact Islamic traditionalists; it is the so-called âmoderatesâ â those wanting to compromise Islam so it can coexist with Western ideas such as secular government, separation of church and state, and human rights â who are the radicals and innovators. The terrorists are simply fulfilling the traditional and orthodox command of their religion to battle the infidels who resist the revelation of Mohammed and the global socio-political order mandated by Islam.
Listen to one of the most respected and influential of Muslim clerics, Sheikh Yousef Al-Qaradhawi, on the legitimacy of jihad: âIt has been determined by Islamic law that the blood and property of people of Dar Al-Harb [the Domain of Disbelief where the battle for the domination of Islam should be waged] is not protected. Because they fight against and are hostile towards the Muslims, they annulled the protection of his blood and his property." (See Andrew Bostom: Also worth reading. BTW, Qaradawi just received a visa to visit Britain, maybe to do a victory lap.). This interpretation is entirely consistent with fourteen centuries of Islamic theology and jurisprudence, which in turn is based on the Koran's injunction to âslay them [infidels] wherever you catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter . . . . Such is the reward of those who suppress faith.â And this jihad is to continue âuntil persecution is no more, and religion is all for Allah.â
Islam's divinely sanctioned entitlement to global domination explains the symbolic value of the London attacks: one day after London was chosen to host the 2012 Olympics, and right in the middle of the G8 summit in Scotland. For both the Olympics and the G8 represent a global order that rivals Islam, one based on Western ideals and institutions, a social and political order in which Islam has no exalted position but is simply one religion among many. And, we should add, a global order whose notions of individual rights and secular government are incompatible with Islamic law.
So much is obvious â facts of the historical record. Yet listen to a respected historian in a conservative magazine: âMuslim holy wars (âjihadsâ), as taught in the Koran, were first and foremost a personal inner struggle for moral purityâ and only secondarily a war against infidels. So all those Muslim armies that conquered the Christian Near East, North Africa, Egypt, Spain, Sicily, the Balkans, all that plunder, slaughter, rape, enslavement, kidnapping, and destruction were only the âsecondaryâ jihad. How could such blindness to the obvious, masquerading as sophisticated âtolerance,â not arouse contempt in the minds of our adversaries? They tell us over and over that they are waging jihad in order to establish the global hegemony of Islam, and we tell ourselves that these Muslims don't understand their own religion. Millions and millions of Muslims all over the world cheer for the jihadists and support them materially and psychologically, millions idolize bin Laden and celebrate the murder of Westerners, but we tell ourselves that they are a minority of confused souls whose minds have been addled by poverty or autocracy or anger over the Palestinians.
In any conflict it's a good idea to take seriously the motives the enemy professes and not rationalize or explain them away in terms of your own cultural assumptions. The murderers we call terrorists are traditional jihadists, as much as were the first Islamic armies that swept away the Judeo-Christian and Greco-Roman civilizations of the Mediterranean. They are not going to be bought off with votes, a free press, more cable channels, Wal-Mart, or any other material good that to us constitutes the good life. They are fighting for a spiritual cause, the establishment of Islam as a global order in fulfillment of the will of Allah, and the reduction of all those who will not become Muslims to dhimmi, inferiors who acknowledge the superiority of Islam and the rightness of their subjection to it.
The next few weeks will show whether the British have advanced as far down the road of dhimmitude as have the Spaniards, who responded to the murder of their citizens not with the force and resistance their ancestors showed for seven centuries, but with fear and appeasement. As for us, we'd better discard our illusions that the jihadists, as Thomas Freidman put it, are âa cancer within the [Islamic] body politicâ and accept instead that jihad just may be a vital organ. Then maybe we can see this war for what it is: one more episode in the long struggle between what used to be called Christendom and a religion of aggressive conquest and colonization.
Posted by: ed ||
07/18/2005 06:12 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
