Speaking Truth to Power – END OF GM, OR A NEW BEGINNING? by William Reed Columnist

Chevrolet-Saturn of Harlem Inc. was the first filing of the day General Motors sought Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection and recorded the nation’s fourth largest bankruptcy.  As of June 1, 2009, “What’s good for GM is definitely good for American taxpayers”.  American taxpayers’ $50 billion investment now totals a 60 percent stake in GM, while the union, its creditors and federal and provincial governments in Canada own the remainder of the auto company.

In its past 100 years of operations, what’s been good for GM has been good for Black Americans as well.  From its early times, GM helped build Black America’s middle class.   GM was a beacon in the industrial north from the 1930s until the 1950s when hundreds of thousands of Blacks migrated out of the rural South following their dreams of a better life through jobs in the auto industry.   From the Great Depression to the riots of the 1960′s, GM was a major propeller for Black growth.

In 1971, Dr. Leon H. Sullivan became the first African American appointed to the Board of Directors of a Fortune 500 company with a seat on GM’s board.  That appointment caused President Lyndon B. Johnson to say, "Now what’s good for General Motors really is good for America".  An impetus to LBJ’s Great Society initiatives, Sullivan’s election was widely regarded as an important test of the idea that a Black presence in the corporation’s board room could make a giant corporation more sensitive to the needs of minorities.  Rev. Sullivan helped GM set a trend opening occupational, educational, and economic opportunities for African Americans.  The “Sullivan Principles” are etched in corporate annals as codes of corporate social responsibility conduct.

It was GM that provided buses to transport people to the Poor Peoples’ March on Washington.  Since the early 1970s, well ahead of other companies, General Motors has gone the extra mile to make sure the American dream was achievable for all Americans.  Under the guidance of Sullivan, in 1972 GM became the first auto company to launch minority dealer and minority supplier initiatives.  It spent $2.5 billion with people of color and women-owned suppliers in the US, and had full-time management focused on supplier diversity.

When he died in 2001, Rev. Sullivan would have never considered that GM would have to file for bankruptcy.  During these hard times, it’s important to note that every General Motors car coming off an American assembly line in recent years had something in it made by minorities.  Black Americans particularly should recognize the role GM has played in the economic development of communities over the years. It employed ordinary Black men and women who paid mortgages, put kids through college, and helped anchor our communities. Sullivan got Blacks into GM’s business mix: advertisements in black publications; opening an account in each of the nation’s black-owned banks; and placement of billion of dollars with black underwriters for insurance on its buildings.

Battered by almost $88 billion of losses since 2004, the auto giant went to its knees.  In order for GM to survive, Blacks, and all Americans should consider GM’s impact in our communities, past and future, and know that we are stakeholders in the company.  With sufficient customer and investor support GM can get back on its feet and its stock price back into the $30s or 40s.  Then, the US government sells the stock it holds and keeps the money which is payback for the loans/bailouts.

In the next few months, GM should emerge from bankruptcy as a reasonable competitor.  The new company will shed plants, dealerships, debt and other liabilities it can no longer afford.  Emerging out of bankruptcy will be a "new GM," made up of four brands that GM will keep in the U.S. market — Chevrolet, Cadillac, GMC and Buick.  GM should reap what it’s sowed.  Blacks’ reciprocity should put them among the first throng of loyal American customers rejecting foreign vehicles.  Blacks should be advancing our own interests by showing up at GM showrooms in Harlem and elsewhere and “Buying American”.

(William Reed – www.BlackPressInternational.com)

Speaking Truth to Power – IS “AFFIRMATIVE ACTION” ON THE ROCKS AT THE RNC? by William Reed Columnist

The thought was that the Republican National Committee’s “Affirmative Action” would be an example of the party retooling its image, message and appeal to young voters and minorities.  But the RNC’s election of Michael S. Steele as Chairman of national political operations is now under question, and the concept of “affirmative action” given another set-back.  The nation’s affirmative action incentive is to promote equal opportunity “toward maximizing diversity, along with its perceived benefits, in all levels of society”.  As the 63^rd chairman of the Republican National Committee (RNC), and the first African American, Michel Steele is among the highest levels of America’s political industry.

The RNC provides the party’s national leadership.  The Office of the Chairman is responsible for developing and promoting the political platform, as well as coordinating fundraising and election strategy.   The RNC is a 168-member body comprised of the chairs of each state committee.  Michael Steele has the background regarding responsibilities of the GOP’s top job.  He has been chair of a Maryland county committee and the state committee.  He headed GOPAC, a major organization focused on recruiting Republican candidates to run races at state and local levels.  But questions now abound regarding Michael Steele’s management and decision-making.  When he took over at the RNC Steele brought in his personal assistant from other jobs.  It raised eyebrows of the RNC when the body learned Steele gave her $85,615 a year, a salary nearly three times the $29,240.88 her predecessor made.   Mr. Steele hired another prior associate, Angela Sailor, to be the party’s outreach director at a salary of $180,000, more than double her predecessor’s compensation, though new responsibilities have been added to the job.  Republican state party chairs cited “cronyism” and instigated confrontation over who controls the party’s purse strings to the point that Steele relinquished some controls.

Instead of carrying forth the banner of affirmative action, Steele & Company are now “in the weeds” fighting off questions about his management style and decision making.  "These salaries are way out of line for what staff should be paid for working for a political party, which most of us think of as a cause," said Hawaii Republican Party Chairman Willis Lee.  The “outreach position” has long been a cause of consternation among the GOP.  Ms. Sailor’s salary is $97,000 more than the $83,000 a-year paycheck the previous outreach director, Shannon Reeves, another African American received.  The Outreach Director is responsible for increasing the presence of minorities in the party, but based on results toward that goal to date, RNC members have reason to question why Ms. Sailor’s salary is more than that of the second-highest ranking elected official on the committee, Co-Chairman Jan Larimer, who makes about $140,000?

Before mob-action to force his resignation, it can’t yet be officially said that Steele has squandered his time in the seat.  When he was elected RNC Chairman in January, one of the major concerns in the professional political class was whether he could raise the sort of money to keep the RNC competitive.  Fundraising has been Steele’s strong suit.  The RNC has outpaced the DNC in campaign contributions the first four months of this year.  The RNC raised $31 million in the first third of 2009, compared to the DNC’s $22.3 million.  Steele’s RNC raised almost $5.8 million in April and ended the month with $24.4 million on hand.

Whether Steele’s chairmanship records as the RNC’s “affirmative action success story”, or its “faux pas”, remains to be seen, but it should not be perceived as sufficient redress to party discrimination toward blacks.  With, or without Steele, the Republican Party is not close to serious competition with Democrats for African American votes.  Blacks are not on the GOP’s A-list and its single digit performances among African Americans in two of the last three presidential elections are emblematic of a party with serious outreach problems.  Michael Steele’s tenure has not been a boon for the black image in the party and unlikely to bring about a change needed in Republican leadership’s mindsets.

(William Reed – www.BlackPressInternational.com)

Speaking Truth to Power – Band (Or Ban) Aid?

The higher they go in America’s institutions African Americans are bound to buy into the system.  Though these Blacks know how establish practices have encumbered us here, they’ve bought into ‘the White Man’s Burden” mindset and paternalistic practices toward Africans.

Blacks in Congress continue treating Africa and Africans as charity cases and are willing partners in the exploitation of their resources.  Whites’ exploitation of Africa stems from their presumed responsibility to govern and impart their culture to uncouth nonwhites.  The colonial mentality is now manifesting itself through benign meddling by Blacks following White Folks’ lead in foreign aid and intervention practices toward Africans.

In the latest in a series of “America knows best for Africa” events, three African American Members of Congress allowed themselves to be arrested in front of the Sudanese Embassy in Washington “urging world leaders to take a stand against Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir’s decision to expel 13 aid agencies from Darfur”.  Western-based humanitarian leaders joined forces with five U.S. lawmakers, including Black Representatives Donna Edwards of Maryland, Keith Ellison of Minnesota and John Lewis of Georgia to say the Sudanese government’s decision to expel the agencies will leave “1.1 million civilians without food aid, 1.5 million without health care and more than 1 million without potable water.  Ellison calls it “wrong to deny aid to the most vulnerable people on our planet."

Whether or not aid for people in Darfur is being denied differs as to perspective.  When al-Bashir threw the Western aid agencies out, he said “Sudanese would take care of the distribution”.  But, Ellison, et al, view al-Bashir as another hapless African leader needing to be removed from office and Sudanese operations as incapable, lacking in agency, and in permanent need of external direction.

The three Black Congressional Crusaders went spastic because al-Bashir banned the aid groups, willingly        taking the word of the aid agents known to be antagonistic to al-Bashir.  But Africans, and many other nonwhites, could fathom that some among the foreign aid groups “aided” the International Criminal Court (ICC) in their indictment of al-Bashir for “war crimes”.  Why is it beyond Western reason that aid agencies’ agents tattled on Bashir’s government; or that Sudanese can handle relief efforts there?  Al-Bashir says the 13 agencies he expelled “used the Darfur conflict to embezzle money from Sudan”.   He says that the humanitarian groups “claim to spend billions of dollars in Darfur”, but his government calculates “they spend less than $100 million a year”.  Al-Bashir says his government is ready to “match that amount”, and ordered Sudanese aid groups to take over all relief distribution.  Westerners call him “defiant” in saying: "If they want to bring relief, let them drop it at airports or seaports. Let our organizations deal with our citizens."

Who wrote rules that only Westerners can provide humanitarian aid in Africa?  There is a $1.05 billion aid operation planned for Darfur in 2009 and other countries in the region say they will assist in Darfur.  Yet Ellison & Crew are wary of giving money to Sudanese, or regional agencies, without the involvement of Westerners.  Al-Bashir’s alleged Great Expulsion of the Humanitarians must be put into perspective: 85 nongovernmental organizations are still working in Darfur and less than 200 aid workers have left.

Surely “do-gooders” Ellison, Edwards, Lewis, et al, need to slow their roll and be less paternalist and more realistic.  At least the Blacks should pay attention to increasing numbers of nonwhites’ call for “an end” to current aid practices.  Be it Myanmar or Darfur, the sign says: “No (Western) Help Wanted”.  “Trade not aid” is what Africans seek, but the three Congressional “crusaders for conscious” are caught up in a vicious cycle that helped transform the people who possess two-thirds of the world’s mineral resources into the two-thirds that are the world’s poorest.  Instead of paternalistic meddling and demonstrations for 13 aid agencies and 200 people to be returned to Darfur, isn’t it time Black legislators abandon soapbox rhetoric on Africa and do some good toward helping break the bonds, and bounds, of African dependency and Western dominance?

(William Reed – www.BlackPressInternational.com)

Speaking Truth to Power – WHO DAT SAID "FREE CHICKEN”? by William Reed Columnist

Thanks to Oprah promoting a free meal, KFC is popular again.  Demand was so rampant for coupons good for two pieces of Kentucky Grilled Chicken, two individual sides and a biscuit at participating KFC restaurants in the US that the site experienced significant “technical difficulties”.  The overwhelming interest in the promotion to download the grilled chicken coupon amounted to a harrowing power struggle between those who secured coupons and those of only a proverbial “wing and a prayer”.

And, in spite of the hapless mother who complained: “I’ve been trying to access the kfc coupon for over an hour now… i don’t know what’s wrong…and I really needed that coupon to feed my 2year old,” the promotion was a huge success.  KFC and Oprah did what they intended to do; which was to create awareness of KFC Grilled Chicken.  They let consumers taste the product and in doing so they created an overwhelming demand.  People talked about it, they send coupons to everyone they knew.  The charitable downloaded coupons and gave them to the homeless.  The “chicken coup” may be the greatest PR strategy ever. 

Every day, 23 million chickens are prepared for food in the U.S.  Louisville-based KFC, a subsidiary of Yum Brands, hopes grilled chicken will lure back health-conscious consumers who dropped fried chicken from their diets, or cut back on indulging.  KFC’s new “Unthink What You Thought about KFC” initiative is a Web-based user-generated content campaign to push the company’s new grilled balanced lifestyle items.  The “Unthink KFC” site offers a fun way for users to get involved in the brand as well as a source of nutritional information. 

Last year, Yum had 30 percent operating profit growth in its China division, where KFC is a dominant fast-food brand, while U.S. operations had a 3 percent decline.  Yum and KFC say they want health-conscious customers back.  Their objective was to show the other side of KFC that isn’t fried.  The grilled chicken breast has 17 less grams of fat than the fried counterpart.

KFC has over 14,000 outlets in 105 countries and territories around the world.  The breakthrough to the new offering came when the company solved operational problems with a new oven that grills a batch of chicken in just over 20 minutes.  Customers in select U.S. cities will soon be greeted at KFCs by lighted “Now Grilling” signs.  Even the brand’s ubiquitous chicken buckets will get a makeover.  Buckets will still feature founder Harland Sanders but will get a redesign to promote fried and grilled chicken.

African Americans’ affinity with “the yard bird” and KFC is long and legend.  Twelve percent of the U.S. population, Blacks have represented over 20 percent of KFC customers from the beginning.  In the 1970s and 80s, the company negotiated and signed a “covenant” with PUSH for increased reciprocity and franchises with Blacks.  The company has been named one of FORTUNE magazine’s “Top 50 Employers for Minorities”.

KFC has a long presence and has made a distinctive outreach to urban markets.  The new restaurant design is adorned inside and out with paintings by famed African American artist Charly (Carlos) Palmer.   A prototype restaurant is in Washington, D.C. where they updated an old KFC urban location.  The restaurant increased business by more than 20 percent and, most importantly, changed how KFC team members and customers felt about the KFC brand.

In addition to their Oprah Connection, KFC is marketing public service across the nation.  KFC has sent a letter to U.S. mayors, offering to fill up potholes in their cities’ streets. Mayors must nominate their cities to be refreshed, and those that win will have their potholes filled and marked with the words “Re-freshet by KFC” in non-permanent street chalk.  The phrase refers to the fact that the chain uses only fresh chicken, which is shipped weekly to its stores.

In the end, we now know that: 1) Oprah is a media phenomenon with the reach and credibility to create a trend and influence; 2) People love chicken and 3) People love chicken even more when it’s free.

(William Reed – www.BlackPressInternational.com)

Speaking Truth To Power – HOW WILL YOU HANDLE MOMMA’S HOMEGOING? by William Reed Columnist

African Americans born in the 1930s and 40s knew another America.  Their children have advanced their station and now have different views.  But, at the end of the day the question is “How will you sent Momma home?

Back in the day, times from segregation shaped Black’s funeral services in the music, tone and tenor of tributes.  The typical Black funeral was: a public viewing, solos like “Last Mile of the Way”, a thunderous sermon by a preacher and an ad-hoc choir that rocked the house.  After roaring tributes; the preacher, then the family, congregation and choir would follow the funeral director and pall-bearers to the hearse.  The congregation caravanned to the cemetery and all then gathered back at the church, or hall, to feast on fried chicken and sweet potato pie.

Be on the alert, the rites of African American “Homegoings;” from the fried chicken to the repast, are changing.  Old customs and institutions that were associated with the last rites of African Americans are fading.  There is little question that as today’s generation of Blacks bury their 1940s and 50s era parents mainstream values and institutions impact this final decision.

Before integration only African-American funeral home operators buried African Americans.  Almost all Black Family Homegoings involved the services of a black funeral director, an ex-cop with a motorcycle that directed traffic, a caterer usually associated with a black-owned rental hall, and leaving the body to rest in a traditionally Black-populated cemetery.

What you do at the time of last rites directly relates to recent trends: the decline of black-owned businesses in ‘traditional’ personal services to a predominantly black clientele.  The funeral home industry is big business.  In the U.S. it is a $7 billion-a-year industry.  Tens of millions of dollars are at stake for each operator.  The average cost of a funeral today is $6,500.  As they and families of the nation’s 4 million elderly Blacks prepare for the inevitable, the nation’s 4,000 mostly family-owned Black funeral homes are themselves in a bad state.

Where Momma will lie in state has great economic impact.  African-American funeral homes grew out of the times of segregation to become mainstays of Black community and culture.  Black funeral directors became pillars of their communities.  Most provided their communities folding chairs for parties, limousines for weddings; and, their hearses served as standby ambulances at African-American sporting events. To avoid attacks during the civil-rights movement, leaders like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., often were chauffeured from rallies in hearses by Black undertakers.  They are the last of Black-owned institutions catering to and supported almost exclusively by African-American consumers.

White-owned funeral homes actively market in Black communities.  Large white-owned firms are buying up area funeral businesses and offering both funeral and burial services to the African-American community.  International funeral firms such as Service Corp., Alderwoods Group, Stewart Enterprises, Hillenbrand Industries and Carriage Services are as likely to get the body of a deceased Black as the local African American mortician. 

As African Americans become more mainstream oriented, institutions and businesses, such as those of Black funeral directors, are suffering declining market share.  Many blacks have joined integrated church congregations and now follow their practices for death and burials.  Integration and today’s blacks’ decline in racial identification has also all but eliminated the black funeral home, lost revenues for Black newspapers for announcement of the passing, and the use of the services of the black-owned food hall and that of the discourteous traffic cop.

In the U.S., the nearly 22,000 funeral operators average 2 funerals per week.  The week your loved one passes will you be sending them home via a Black or White-owned hearse?  The question is more than about “how to handle this particular passing?” it goes to a basic capitalistic issue of supporting your own.  In this case, and other purchases you make: Isn’t it economic suicide for blacks to take their consumer dollars outside our communities?  In death, as in life in America, integration is undoing us as other ethnic groups build their communities’ wealth with our dollars. 

(William Reed – www.BlackPressInternational.com)

Speaking Truth to Power – TIME TO BURN YOUR CREDIT CARDS? by William Reed Columnist

The credit card industry is one of the nation’s most powerful and lucrative businesses and President Barack Obama says his administration will push for more protections for credit card consumers.  After summoning senior credit card industry execs to the White House, the nation’s consumer-in-chief said, "The days of any-time, any-reason rate hikes and late-fee traps have to end".

The stakes couldn’t be higher and the purveyors of plastic don’t intend to be forced into financial submission. The industry annually collects an estimated $3 trillion in annual credit and debit card transactions, plus billions more in late fees and other charges.

America is a nation propped up on credit card debt.  The average U.S. household carries more than $10,000 in credit card debt.  Many consumers have complained about the high-fees of credit card companies and the U.S. House has approved a bill that would stop credit card issuers from imposing arbitrary interest rate increases and penalties, while halting certain billing practices.

A credit card is a pre approved loan with flexible repayment options.  It’s distinguished from other financial instruments by the freedom it gives borrowers to determine the size of the loan and the pace at which it is repaid.  Data collected by the Federal Reserve shows minorities most at risk of damaging their financial futures due to poor credit card management. African American households, in particular spend larger percentages of their incomes paying credit card and other high interest rate debt, heading closer to foreclosure bankruptcy while enriching lenders.

In 2001, 59 percent of African American families had credit cards, compared to 82 percent of white families. Although African American households have lower rates of credit card ownership, African American cardholders are more likely than whites to have credit card debt.  Credit card debt has caused African American families to use critical financial resources to pay mounting monthly interest payments instead of saving or acquiring assets.  Unfortunately, most of the debt African Americans have accumulated is used for items that depreciate in value, such as cars, furniture, electronics, and appliances. This is an indication that blacks use credit inappropriately – to stretch their incomes. Historic redlining by traditional banks has left high-interest credit cards as one of the few easily accessible sources of loans for minorities.

Close to two million African American households have annual incomes of at least $75,000, but there are comparatively few affinity, co-branded and reward cards targeted specifically to blacks.  However, the high levels of unbanked and underbanked blacks have spawn affinity and co-branded prepaid cards marketed primarily to them.  One example is record industry mogul Russell Simmons’ Visa RushCard.  Though Simmons wasn’t in the White House meeting on credit cards his company is a symptom of the problem.  He claims to be solving problems for underbanked communities, which often lack access top a bank account, but complaints are mounting about the fee structure of his prepaid Visa RushCard.  To utilize Simmons’ RushCard and “live the American Dream” requires an activation fee of $19.95, a daily convenience fee of $1 (capped at $10 a month) and a $1.95 ATM cash withdrawal fee.

It’s going to take more than Obama taking credit card executives to the White House woodshed.  Americans are used to credit cards and most have at least one credit card.  When they go shopping, they just use their credit cards, since they don’t have to pay cash many feel as if they’re not spending their own money.  Good financial management for African Americans requires actively tracking credit card usage and considering it a portion of overall net worth.  When the economy is good, people do not worry because they know they can pay in one month when the credit card company sends them a bill.  But now the economy is so bad, many people can not pay for the total amount and pay just the minimum which puts them in a 19 percent to 24 percent high interest rate category.

A rule of thumb for credit card use in today’s economic times – if you can’t afford it, don’t buy it.

(William Reed – www.BlackPressInternational.com)

Speaking Truth To Power – BLACKS SAY “LIFT THE EMBARGO ON CUBA!” by William Reed Columnist

A recent Black Caucus delegation visitation to Cuba has riled up America’s anti-Fidel Castro forces.  They are against lifting the 47-year-old trade and travel embargoes of that island nation.  President Barack Obama proposes lifting travel restrictions on Cuban-Americans, but Black Caucus delegation members say the larger economic blockade of Cuba should also be brought to an end.

Over the years the Black Caucus has sought trade and travel with the Caribbean country just 90 miles off US shores.  A Congressional Black Caucus 2000 delegation set up a model for the two countries working together.  Regarding the subject of underserved medical needs of American inner cities, Castro suggested granting scholarships to low-income youths selected by the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) to come to Cuba and study medicine.   The 2009 delegation found over 100 American students – more than half of them black – enrolled in the program at the Latin American School of Medicine (LASM).  LASM is a prominent part of the Cuban healthcare system and is possibly the largest medical school in the world.   The CBC’s scholars receive free educations as doctors, nurses and dentists.  Rev. Lucius Walker, executive director of the Interreligious Foundation for Community Organization, the New York-based group that receives and processes the applications for the scholarship says “We see it as a tremendous opportunity to help provide quality medical care in underserved communities”.  (According to the U.S. Census, only about 5% of U.S. doctors are black)

At the recent Summit of the Americas, President Obama suggested that the U.S. could learn a lesson of goodwill from Cuba.  In 1998, Cuba’s government began programs to send large-scale medical assistance to poor populations affected by natural disasters.  Each year some 2,000 young people enroll at the school, which operates from a former naval base in a suburb of Havana.  Cuba’s 21 medical faculties all train young people of poor families from throughout the Americas, as well as hundreds of African, Arab, Asian and European students.   The country sends teams of doctors all over the world to respond to natural disasters.  Cuban doctors have provided medical services to the underserved in Africa for over a decade.

Blacks’ views of relations with Cuba differ vastly from those of most Cuban immigrants and Cuban-Americans.  The former lily-white upper crust of Cuban society wield political clout in Florida and are dead set against normalizing relations with Cuba’s government.  Consequently most politicians have chosen to adopt Cuban-American views.  From 1960 to 1979, hundreds of thousands of Cubans began new lives in the US.  Most of these Cuban Americans came were from educated upper and middle classes and form the backbone of the anti-Castro movement.  Cuban Americans are America’s fifth-largest Hispanic group and the largest Spanish-speaking group of white descent.

Back home, Black Cubans made great advances in the past four decades and are often cited as one of the signal accomplishments of Castro’s revolution.  The medical programs are an example.  Cuban officials report there being 13,000 black physicians among the country’s 11 million people, compared to America’s 20,000 black doctors in its population of 290 million.

At present, the embargo limits American businesses from conducting business with Cuban interests.  It is the most enduring trade embargo in modern history.  Despite the embargo, the US is the fifth largest exporter to Cuba (5.1% of Cuba’s imports are from the US). Polling indicates that the American public is ambivalent about continuing the embargo.  A 2007 AP/Ipsos Poll indicates that 48% of Americans favor continuing the embargo, against 40% who favor ending it.

Mainstream media joined anti-Castro hardliners denouncing the Black Caucus position on Cuba, but that view is also opposed by business leaders who claim that freer trade would be good for Cuba and the United States.  Like the Black Caucus, US corporate interests are impatient to do business with Cuba. Oil companies want to drill offshore, farmers to export more rice, vegetables and meat, construction firms to build infrastructure projects.  Young Cubans from families exiled to Florida are less radical than their parents and also advocate ending the policy.

(William Reed – www.BlackPressInternational.com)

Speaking Truth to Power – The Business of Piracy by William Reed Columnist

In East Africa hijacking has developed into a highly structured social and business model.  Modern-day piracy is Somalia’s most lucrative business.  In the booming pirate port of Ely, Somalia big villas and hotels are sprouting and former subsistence fishermen are driving Mercedes-Benzes.

The pirate city is Somalia’s sole boomtown. Somalia has no central government, no banks and few opportunities.  In a country that has seen 14 provisional governments since 1991, multimillion dollar ransoms are one of few ways to earn a living in the war-ravaged and impoverished region.  Nearly half the population depends on aid.  Since the civil war many coastal Somalis have turned to buccaneering as a business.

Eyl is a costal town in the northern region of Somalia and home to Somali men such as those who hijacked the American cargo ship Maersk Alabama.  Banditry at sea offers power and potential prosperity in a land so bleak that life expectancy is just 46 years and a quarter of children die before they reach 5.  Piracy evolved due to Somalia’s lawlessness and Eyl’s strategic location.  Thirty 30 percent of the world’s oil goes through the narrow Gulf of Aden off Somalia’s northern coast.  One of the world’s busiest waterways, 20,000 merchant ships pass through the Gulf of Aden on their way to and from the Suez Canal each year.

Their booty from one of the world’s busiest waterways has made Somali’s coastal bandits the country’s wealthiest people and propelled piracy and ransoming to the country’s largest income-earner.  In Somalia, where the average family lives on less than $1 a day, the lure of the black flag is intoxicating.   The Somali pirates made $125 million in 2008.

In Eyl, hijacking is the main industry.  In the boomtown, fancy houses are being built and expensive cars and consumer goods are being bought.  The going rate for ransom payments is between $300,000 and $1.5 million.  Even though the number of pirates who actually take part in a hijacking is relatively small, the whole modern industry of piracy involves many more people that reside in and around Eyl.

These are not the rum-drunk, eccentric, peg-leg pirates of yesteryear: Africa’s modern corsair is well-organized, disciplined and toting a satellite phone. Now that they are making so much money, these 21st Century pirates can afford increasingly sophisticated weapons and speedboats.

The number of people who make the first attack is small, normally from seven to 10.  They seek up to hulking ships at night in small, powerful unlit speedboats, fling grappling hooks over the side and board.   Once they seize the ship, about 50 pirates stay on board the vessel. And about 50 more wait on shore in case anything goes wrong.  Given all the other people involved in the piracy industry, including those who feed hostages, it has become a mainstay of the Eyl’s economy.

In spite of the Maersk Alabama’s rescue, the pirates lost little and still have much to gain continuing to strike.  The pirates, ship owners and insurers all know that it’s more cost-effective to pay ransoms. The pirates’ current average bounty of $300,000 to $1 million ransom per vessel is significantly cheaper option for owners than buying a new ship.  Most tankers and ships are not armed, or if they are, they have small side arms.  The pirates circle the vessel and threaten to blow it out of the water with rocket-propelled grenades or shoulder-launched missiles.  Faced with that prospect, most captains – to save the life of their crew and the vessels – will surrender control to pirates.

Shippers are paying premium prices for coverage of trips through the Gulf of Aden and millions of dollars on diversions and extra security.  The pirates’ business practices are effective primarily because of their simplicity.  In a country where banking no longer functions everything is done by cash.  And, as long as pirates can get shippers to airdrop tens of thousands of $100 notes as ransom payments Eyl will continue as “Blingtown” flush with new cars, plush houses, Sean Jean clothes and cologne and satellite televisions and bigger guns.

(William Reed – www.BlackPressInternational.com)

Speaking Truth To Power – CASTING DOUBT ABOUT “SAVE DARFUR” by William Reed Columnist

“Oh, I say and I say it again, ya been had!  Ya been took!  Ya been hoodwinked! Bamboozled!  Led astray!  Run amok! This is what He does….”- Malcom X

In Harlem in the 1960s Malcolm meant “bamboozle” as “to deceive or get the better of (someone) by trickery, flattery, or the like”.  In today’s world it is the regular manufacture and maintenance of false realities in the service of American empire.  The deception El Haji Malik El-Shabazz talked about is a core function among America’s Establishment and its corporate news media.  In the case of being tricked into a war in Africa, Malcolm might say “take a close look behind the façade”.

Among the latest false realities being pushed are the simplistic pictures of Black vs. Arab genocide in Darfur, and the proposed solution: a robust U.S.-backed or U.S.-led military intervention in Western Sudan.  Before Black Americans buy into any concept of European troops invading Africa to “save Africans,” they should give more scrutiny to what the “Save Darfur” lobby and Save Darfur Coalition are all about.  Malcolm might say it is a PR scam to justify U.S. intervention in Africa.

Save Darfur aims to “save Darfur” by raising awareness, not by providing on-the-ground humanitarian assistance.  The campaign is a political mechanism that has misled the public into the belief that it is a humanitarian relief operation. The con has morphed false allegations of “slavery in Sudan” in the 1990s into the anti-genocide advocacy model for the 21^st century: a hybrid of promotional branding, simplified foreign political coverage and interventionist missionary ideology.  Founded in 2004, the Save Darfur Coalition began at the Graduate Center of City University of New York.  The coalition is now an alliance of 180 faith-based, advocacy and human rights groups with over one million activists.  Headquartered in Washington, D.C., it employs a staff of 30 professional organizers, policy advisors and communications specialists.

Before people of color allow former colonialist to invade Africa again in the name of “saving them,” note should be taken of the assumptions used by “Save Darfur” that are based on victimization and perpetuating stereotypes of Africans as helpless.  The PR campaign depicts the Darfur conflict as strictly a racial affair, in which Arabs are exterminating the black population.  But in fact, most of Sudan’s “Arabs”, even the Janjiweed, are also black.  Note should be taken that “Save Darfur” is top-heavy with evangelical Christians who preach the coming war for the end of the world and with elements known for uncritical support of Israeli aggression in the Middle East.  The very name “Save Darfur” is based on a premise of American moral superiority and dominance and presupposes that: the Darfuris need saving and the US has the capacity to save them.

For those willing to pull the wool from over their heads, there’s ample evidence that leaders of the “Save Darfur” movement have little interest in political negotiations to end conflicts in Darfur, and are totally oblivious to actual genocide occurring in Gaza.  Those activists actually seeking peace instead of military aggression in Darfur should note the selective and cynical application of the term “genocide” to Sudan, rather than to the Congo where ten to twenty times as many Africans lives have been lost.  The hypocrisy of the “Save Darfur” movement is illustrated in Sudan’s neighboring country, the Democratic Republic of the Congo.  There local gangsters, mercenaries, warlords and invading armies engage in slaughter, mass rape and regional depopulation on a scale that dwarfs anything in Sudan, yet all players eagerly compete to guarantee extraction of coltan vital for Western computers and cell phones, and the export of uranium for Western nuclear reactors, along with diamonds, gold and other Congolese resources continue undisturbed.

Its O.K. if you’ve “been had” with illusions sold you over past years.  The problem is not re-thinking what the solution should be.  Most African Americans that have been seeking to “Save Darfur” are well-intentioned.  But, to reach their positive goals, it’s essential they rethink their approach to Darfur and try to empower, rather than dehumanize, people there.

(William Reed – www.BlackPressInternational.com)

Speaking Truth To Power – NO WIN, NO WAY – Will the NAACP Prevail? by William Reed Columnist

“They say” the foreclosure mess “was caused by government meddling in the business affairs of private banks which forced them to loan to unqualified minority home buyers”.  Watch the nation’s cable networks and they’ll have you believing that the mortgage debacle is the fault of dark-skinned people from the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) who got mortgages they couldn’t afford to pay.

But, what if it turns out that the blacks could’ve afforded the properties, only that the banks charged them as if they couldn’t?  The NAACP has filed class action suits against Wells Fargo, based in San Francisco, and Illinois-based HSBC alleging that the banks used institutionalized, systematic racism against African Americans”.  Their evidence shows black home owners were 30 percent likelier to have been issued a higher interest rate than white borrowers with the same credit qualifications.

The NAACP’s litigation against racism in the financial industry began in 2007.  The NAACP has filed discrimination lawsuits against Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase and General Electric Co.’s subprime lending unit, WMC Mortgage.  The suits cite studies that document discrimination; including a 2006 report by the Center for Responsible Lending that found black people were 31 to 34 percent more likely to receive higher-rate subprime loans. The suit claims the banks violated the Fair Housing Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the Civil Rights Act.  “These banks have a pattern of charging black people more, even though they have good credit, good assets and good incomes,” said NAACP President and CEO Benjamin Jealous.

Wells Fargo and HSBC each have categorically denied the allegations.  The TV pundits aren’t in much of a mood for “this kind of nonsense” either.  “Sometimes I think the NAACP stands for the National Association for the Advancement of Colossal Paranoia” said a guy on the “fair and balanced” network.  They sneer at the class action and say “blacks are playing the race card” and “maybe they would have got a better deal at the Maxine Waters Bank and Loan”.

Even when the evidence is clear that black home buyers were given the short shift, there’s shared silence on the subject.  In the age of Obama, many ungrateful African-Americans are ambivalent toward the NAACP.  Black borrowers are 3.3 times as likely as white borrows to be in foreclosure, but such black and NAACP grievances get little respect or air time.  The guys and girls on TV continually illustrate bias against the NAACP, with some labeling the class action lawsuits “a fishing expedition”.  Ironically, many blacks whom the NAACP helped get to middle class statuses; now are likely to be in league with the TV pundits’ rhetoric and during their time around company water coolers, they too lambaste the organization.

Wells Fargo’s spokesman said the NAACP’s allegations are “totally unfounded and reckless” and that “we are proud of our lengthy record leading the industry in responsible lending practices and support of communities we serve.”  NAACP President Jealous says the discrimination is real and needs to be addressed.  Jealous says “What we want is transparency and for them to fix the problem.”  Critics of the NAACP say the suits “presuppose that certain groups of people are children and can’t make proper decisions.  So even if one does have an unethical Wells Fargo mortgage person, if you are borrowing tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars, you need to do some diligence and shop that rate around.”

Are African Americans routinely given “the financial shuffle”?  The NAACP needs to get its swagger back and these banks’ misdeeds may help it.  The NAACP contention that during the housing boom, lenders created financial incentives for loan officers and brokers to sell mortgages with higher interest rates and fees than were merited; and coupled that with hefty penalties for borrowers who paid off their loans early.  These loans, disproportionately to black buyers, were then sold at a higher profit in secondary financial markets where they were traded as fodder for mortgage-backed securities.

Sadly, few on either side of America’s racial divide say the NAACP will prevail – what say you?

(William Reed – www.BlackPressInternational.com)