Barack Obama and the Immaculate-Genocide of the African-American MaleBy The Angryindian"Whites should not tyrannize over [blacks], for their disease should entitle them to a double portion of humanity. However, by the same token, whites should not intermarry with them, for this would tend to infect posterity with the 'disorder'... attempts must be made to cure the disease."
- Dr. Benjamin Rush, signatory of the Declaration of Independence and abolitionist
Before I get deep into yet another article on the much ballyhooed “promise” of the ‘Barack Obama for President Movement’ sweeping colonial America, I am keenly aware of a pressing need to be candid with the reader, if only to assuage a mild sense of personal guilt. Firstly, regular readers of my newswire Inteligentaindigena Novajoservo should be aware by now that I as an individual I do not vote in American elections. As an Aboriginal human being indigenous to North America and unwillingly subject to colonialist domination under the political entity known as the United States, I choose not to authenticate the Euro-American claim to this landmass nor my person by legitimising their system of power. So I have no particular love nor preference for any political affiliation associated with the narrowness of American politics.
Secondly, for a variety of reasons and chiefly due to an innate sense of solidarity with my fellow blood-brothers in the Diaspora, while I do not support Obama or his candidacy, on principle I had so far stuck to my decision not to write anything that may in any way jeopardize his race for the White man’s house. With a heavy heart recent events have forced me to reconsider my position and my allegiance to someone in which even I, if only fleetingly, could envisage would bring some pause to the madness of the first world as it applies to the rest of the human community.
There are two distinct actions on the part of Barack Obama that I personally find disgraceful coming from an African, especially an African running for president of the United States. Foremost in my mind is his very public rejection of the Honourable Min. Louis Farrakhan for the crime of expressing his support for the ‘Obama for Change’ campaign. This move on his part was as Uncle Tom-ish as one could get without breaking a chorus of "I Wish I Was in Dixie". Barack has gone above and beyond in making the point to Goy and Zionist America and in no uncertain terms that he did not, wished not and sought not any form of endorsement or sustenance from Minister Farrakhan or the rank and file membership of the Nation of Islam.
He even went so far to do the good darkie dance during the televised democratic debate in Cleveland, OH last week with media-whore number one MSNBC moderator Tim Russert getting in his face with questions, accusations really, about the public NOI endorsement. Instead of challenging Mr. Russert on why this question is not asked of the republican John McCain who grandly accepts endorsements from the likes of evangelical hate-monger John Hagee who calls for open warfare between American Christians and Muslims, he allowed Russert to berate him incessantly on the issue:
TIM RUSSERT: On Sunday, the headline in your hometown paper, Chicago Tribune: “Louis Farrakhan Backs Obama for President at Nation of Islam Convention in Chicago.” Do you accept the support of Louis Farrakhan?
SEN. BARACK OBAMA: You know, I have been very clear in my denunciation of Minister Farrakhan’s anti-Semitic comments. I think that they are unacceptable and reprehensible. I did not solicit this support. He expressed pride in an African American who seems to be bringing the country together. I obviously can’t censor him, but it is not support that I sought. And we’re not doing anything, I assure you, formally or informally with Minister Farrakhan.
TIM RUSSERT: Do you reject his support?
SEN. BARACK OBAMA: Well, Tim, you know, I can’t say to somebody that he can’t say that he thinks I’m a good guy. You know, I—you know, I have been very clear in my denunciations of him and his past statements, and I think that indicates to the American people what my stance is on those comments.
TIM RUSSERT: The problem some voters may have is, as you know, Reverend Farrakhan called Judaism “gutter religion.”
SEN. BARACK OBAMA: Tim, I think—I am very familiar with his record, as are the American people. That’s why I have consistently denounced it. This is not something new. This is something that—I live in Chicago. He lives in Chicago. I’ve been very clear, in terms of me believing that what he has said is reprehensible and inappropriate. And I have consistently distanced myself from him.
That’s for damn sure. Obama and his people have done everything possible to distance themselves from authentic African social identifiers that unlike the Obama campaign, gallantly articulate a reality White Americans have no idea exists right beneath their proverbial noses. It simply is not allowed in the unwritten rules governing American socio-political discourse or policy. “The immoveable veil of Blackness,” Obama so embarrassingly totes as Eugenically articulated by early colonial American Founding Fathers Thomas Jefferson, Dr. Benjamin Rush and the Dred Scott Decision is something to be pitied, not respected, as it falls far short of an authentic humanity. While Europocentric intellectuals were aware of the inherent “humanity” of the African, they only recognized it partially, not unlike how a breeder strives to define a newly recognised species of dog. So to suggest that Barack Obama is subject to right-wing belittlement and the relentless confirmation of his loyalty to White American interests because he is a “Black” candidate is correct and exact. To imply otherwise is simply American revisionism of the highest order.
Not convinced? Any cursory trip through MediaMatters.org will reveal an unending trail of conservative Obama-bashing ranging from doubts about his religious affiliations to his parent’s choice of first and second names. FOX News has stealthily added his image for split-seconds during reports on Osama bin-Forgotten and resident-experts-on-retainer gleefully reinterpret his Indonesian upbringing as clandestine terrorist training. To say that the neo-conservative media brownshirts are painting a picture of a Muslim Manchurian Candidate is putting it mildly. All the while, his choice of questionable pro-war team players and backers such as his silent bond with the Wall Street economic elite however rarely, if ever, face such intense scrutiny. But nothing earns him the ire of the more honestly bigoted in America as does his African blood and hair. These physical markers as referenced by Jefferson and Dr. Rush will forever bind the Negro to a subordinate “otherness” no matter how “White” in action or thought the Negro has struggled to befit or to qualify for entry into colonialist European society.
In other words a Black candidate is just that, a “Black” candidate. And even Black candidates are required to stay in their respective and historical place on the social chessboard. If the reader thinks I’m jesting just go back to Michelle Obama’s statements about her feelings concerning the U.S., comments only a closeted Klansman would have a problem with in a country that kills in order to export “democracy”. When she declared that “…For the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country. Not just because Barack is doing well, but I think people are hungry for change,” the White reactionary backlash was tremendous with the FOX network’s most prominent voice of White Christian male arrogance Bill O’Reilly suggesting that if Michelle Obama, “ - Really feels -- that America is a bad country or a flawed nation, - ” that a ‘lynching party’ is indeed in order:
“And I don't want to go on a lynching party against Michelle Obama unless there's evidence, hard facts, that say this is how the woman really feels. If that's how she really feels -- that America is a bad country or a flawed nation, whatever -- then that's legit. We'll track it down.”
Lynching nooses and White terrorist imagery have no place in a nation proclaiming an unbroken history of justice and reason. So when I say that the failure of Mr. Obama and his team to address these blatantly racist smears on his person, his campaign and his family smacks of moral and personal credulity, I mean just that. Barack Obama is a moral coward. Add to this the other distressing fact that unlike Bill Clinton, Mr. Obama has determinedly refused to defend his wife from the likes of Bill O’Reilly and the rest of the sewer-dwelling neo-conservative propaganda cadre, it is clear to everyone except the politically dim-witted that a real Black American voice Barack Obama is definitely not. Partly because he never so such as cites the explicit race-baiting that is being used against him and mostly because like the much respected Booker T. Washington, Barack Obama has allowed White liberal America to check his African pride and his manhood at the door of the Democratic Party platform. Obama has been publicly punked. And White America loves him dearly for it.
What has not been said aloud and begs some consideration is what Obama’s silence really means. What we see before us is a genuine product of the American colonialist system; the ever-grateful, ethnically and masculinity-emasculated “new” Negro. Castrated silently without fuss or defiance by virtue of his willingness to play the game of graceful living under White domination, Obama has taken Booker T’s social prescription to heart. Accept your lot as the White American ugly step-child, follow the rules an’ shuffle on in a hushed, but dignified desperation. This is the reality of Barack Obama. He is the long awaited get-out-of-jail-for-free card White liberal America has been waiting for.
The other portentous reason I have broken my silence has not so much to do with Minister Farrakhan and the highly disrespectful treatment he has received from Mr. Obama as much as the relevance of his endorsement while open genocide is being conducted against the Indigenous people of Palestine by the racialist, theocratic and genocidal state of Israel. On the heels of another wave of death and destruction from on high by the United States supported Europeanised Western Asian client state, Obama had the nerve to release a public statement not only praising the practice of continuous bombardment and extra-legal kidnappings the American state department likes to call “Extraordinary Rendition” in which he flatly accused the legitimate Palestinian liberation political party Hamas of being entirely responsible for the violence killing scores of their own people. In his statement of support for Palestinian genocide, Obama makes it unambiguous and plain, he stands with the Euro-Israeli lobby all the way:
“The violence in Gaza is the result of Hamas’s decision to launch rocket attacks on Israeli civilians, and Israel has a right to defend itself.”
This testimonial for Arab genocide not only whets the appetite of the Arab-hating AIPAC Zionists, but gives implicit material support to the rabidly anti-Jewish evangelic Christian fundamentalists amongst the U.S. economic elites bent on preserving Israel if only to save the European Jewish population from eternal Hellfire for not accepting Jesus. More importantly, it paves a new bloody road to American regional dominance over all of Western Asia under the banner of Christian-inspired liberation with petroleum as its holy sacrament.
For White liberals seeking a middle-ground that encourages Palestinian submission to European-Jewish authority, such sentiments are borne of an ever-expanding empathy for the political “uniqueness” of the European Semitic holocaust, an apparently never-ending reaction to the White world’s apathetic response to the historical European Judeophobia which ran rampant throughout the last century. I too am highly sympathetic, but not to the point of excusing Israeli xenophobia because of the unfortunate existence of anti-Jewish xenophobia. If genocide was wrong against ethnic Jews in Europe during the 1930’s and 40’s, genocide is also equally inappropriate in Arab Palestine. It is telling that one even needs to consider it imperative to make such particulars a point of awareness at the outset of the 21st century. Especially to a Black man who by all visible as well as historical accounts, should in a visceral sense know better.
Rumour has it that the Israeli general public however does know better. According to a Feb 28th 2008 report by the international news service Democracy Now, Israeli opinion polls demonstrate that more than 64 percent of resident Israelis support a military ceasefire with the legal Palestinian government of Hamas, supposedly the largest majority recorded to date. The Hamas government has offered multiple propositions for an armistice with the Zionist state which has routinely rejected these approaches as a “submission to Islamic terrorism.” The empirical evidence that Israel as a notionally independent country was built on the primary principles of abject terrorism against the United States and Britain is selectively written off as a non-issue. Fortunately for them and their supporters, the English and American public maintains a steadfast effort in remaining historically ignorant of the more disturbing and paradoxical episodes of resistance to Western imperialism.
In all sincerity I am taking a great leap of faith by identifying the White world’s apathy to Palestinian genocide as an issue of pure ignorance. My own position is much more candid in that I unequivocally accuse the world community of wilful indifference to Palestine’s plight in favour of White imperialist privilege. Israel’s macho Deputy Defence Minister Matan Vilnai has publicly pledged on Israeli Army Radio to wage a Palestinian "Holocaust" in the Gaza without incident, while at the same time the western imperialist media machine continues to tout the fib that Iran’s leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad swore to "wipe Israel off the map." Despite the fact that Ahmadinejad, an eccentric bloke in his own right, was purposefully misquoted in a desperate effort to shore up an excuse, any excuse, to invade and occupy Islamic Iran, Vilnai's outrageous and villainous threat to wipe out the very existence not simply of the Palestinian nationality but the annihilation of the Palestinian people receives virtually no condemnation. Innocence paid to unawareness of Israel’s gnawing yearning to rid itself of its Arab population is spurious at best and a morally ambiguous complicity in racist terrorism and Western imperialism at its worst.
This brings us back to The Honourable Min. Louis Farrakhan’s unwelcome endorsement for Barack Obama’s presidency. Like our other brother-in-arms surviving in the Diaspora and himself a former presidential candidate the Reverend Jesse Jackson, Minister Farrakhan has learned the hard way that in the Zionist world, there is no moral obligation to grant forgiveness.
In the sad case of Rev. Jackson he will forever be remembered for being called to the carpet for remarks he may or may not have made to a Negro Washington Post reporter named Milton Coleman, who without delay dashed to inform a Euro-American journalist working at the same tabloid that he personally witnessed Jesse Jackson refer to N.Y. Jews as "Hymies" and to New York City as "Hymietown." According to the article, which appeared the very next morning, the comments were expressed by Jackson during a private conversation with Coleman and several other American African journalists. I for one would like to take for granted that Rev. Jackson, a confidant and partner of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., would not and could not say anything so morally callous, and frankly I don’t think all of the possible aspects of that situation were explored for the obvious reasons. The Euro-American reporter that broke the story freely admitted that his only evidence was anecdotal and that other than Coleman, no one else ever corroborated the account. Despite this, the pressure to compel an apology from Rev. Jackson and every other African political leader they could conceivably intimidate into conveying regret and shame for an assumed communally held American African predisposition towards anti-Semitism was gargantuan and Rev. Jackson naturally succumbed to the weight. To this day I have yet to review anything that supports Rev. Jackson’s supposed Judeophobia and I doubt that I ever will. But it matters little any longer. The damage that was intended had been done.
Minister Farrakhan’s principled support for the campaign of Barack Obama is burdened by the very same factors that I mentioned above. The semantic ju-jitsu employed by the White mainstream media is wholly concerned with specific words or phrases, in particular the overt and concentrated attempt to play on the emotive characteristics of any criticism towards the State of Israel. While common sense would demand that disparagement of the Israeli politic is mutually excusive of denunciation of Jews as an ethnic group, things are not as clear-cut as they should be. Jew haters throughout the White world have worked in various ways to blame Semites for everything from lost crops to missing French children rumoured to be slain for use of their blood for Passover bread. To deny the reality of deep-seated Judeophobia in a world where Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad can accuse Jews worldwide of a conspiracy to take over the planet is foolish although many indifferently do make that claim.
Just recently on an American cable-television game show which asks embarrassingly personal questions in order to win cash money, a guest was asked if she ever lied about being Jewish. A touchy subject to be sure, she was empathically permitted to not answer the query due to its explosive characteristics. Everyone it attendance nodded in camaraderie with her personal struggle and the show as they say, carried on unabated.
At first glimpse it seems that this all-encompassing empathy towards the Jewish struggle, provided the Jew in question is of European origin, is for the most part the most vicious form of parody imaginable and conceivably the most egregious. But looking deeper, it is dangerously elucidating to see how utterly racist Zionism really is. It presupposes a pre-eminence in the human suffering pecking order, a hierarchy we people of colour are told repeatedly between offences does not exist. In the rational universe of the third and fourth worlds, where the personal struggle against extinction is a dynamic of everyday life, this hallucinatory view of the universe is insulting to the point of farce.
Chiefly due to space considerations I will not go into specifics here, I choose to assume that the reader is cognizant of Native American genocide as a blueprint for Germany’s Final Solution. If the reader is not aware of this connection, the fault lies in the manner American history has been repackaged and marketed to the national and international public. The United States, Australia, Canada and Mexico as a matter of common practise dismiss Aboriginal genocide as the end result of reluctance on the part of the Indigenous population to extinguish themselves by accepting colonial subjugation and territorial occupation. So much so that in the generations since, to even imply that murder, pillage and other atrocities were and are practised in these nations against Aboriginals invites belligerent repudiation and often, sadistic retaliation. It has even been charged that the justifiable indignation many conscious Aboriginals and Africans maintain for White America and its values is the “real” problem. Our anger it is said prevents meaningful progress because we find it so hard to “let go of the past” and move further forward into the White haze of an exclusively Europocentric paradise of physical as well as psychological crypto-slavery.
Americans of course are accustomed to excusing genocide, perhaps because they have been skilfully doing so for more than 500 years. How else could they harp on about freedom and human rights while conversely redefining American Indigenous genocide and African involuntary servitude as a necessary, progressive and honourable endeavour for all involved? Given the extent and vigour Euro-Americans have toiled to maintain the United States as a predominately “White” nation, such revisionism illustrates the reality that White society does in fact acknowledge its unsavoury history by twisting it into something much more palatable for the colonial, i.e., White mind.
Barack Obama calls himself an American, so it should not be considered off the mark when I propose that he, like other professed “Americans” regardless of ethnicity, accept Aboriginal and African maltreatment and exploitation as inexorably beneficial and favourable because it led to the contemporary excellence of the United States and by extension, the world as we have all been led to understand it.
This is why the photos of torture from Abu Ghraib mean nothing to the American public. This also goes on to explain why half a million child deaths due to American economic sanctions against Iraq between the two Gulf wars can be admitted to without significant public disapproval. Review the cases of White American colonialist involvement in East Timor, Cambodia, Vietnam, Nicaragua, South Africa and North America.
Let’s face it folks, America is a genocidal empire. By the same token it is an empire that does its level best to deny that it is an empire. It excuses its atrocities and the atrocities of its client states by declaring its hostility as part of the necessary back-braking work needed to spread democracy and free trade. America does not kill to dominate, it is merely spreading the “promise” of freedom. It is an oxymoron of such immense wretchedness it is patently worthy of the Nazi government that the current president’s grandfather so proudly served. Nevertheless, it is the authentic state ideal and creed of the U.S. although very few have dared say so openly. To do so is self-incriminating and White America as a whole has never truly been willing to accept their moral responsibility when historical distortion can divert attention from the reality.
When we are forced to look at Palestine and the Palestinian people, Americans liberal and conservative see what they want to see. 1948 is ignored, the British Mandate is long-forgotten and a Jewish-led genocide is applauded as righteous self-defence against Jewish genocide. In other words, the elimination of the Palestinian populace is, as cheerfully articulated by Madeline Albright on America’s 60 Minutes television programme in reference to the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi babies, a necessary price to pay for European-Jewish survival. Boiled down, an Arab life means absolutely nothing. Like the razing of a viable and potentially resistant North American Aboriginal presence, the destruction of the Palestinian Arab populace must take place for the existence of a “White” Israel to be secure. The rebuff of the dark reality of Zionism in its purest form as an extremist political movement dedicated to ensuring European Jewish cohesion and interests are made manifest by any means necessary is to be selectively judicious in regards to the usage of aggression. Hence, the sympathy extended to Irgun’s desperate attempts to build an alliance with the German Nazi Party to assist them in battling the British for control of Palestine under the British Mandate. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, even when they are Nazis primarily responsible for the systematic eradication of Semitic Europe if the ultimate goal is a Jewish homeland in someone else’s country.
The Jewish translation of Manifest Destiny in Greater Palestine differs little in theory and practise from its Euro-American predecessor. And the vastly escalating support Israel receives from the more radically inclined neo-conservative and theological elements within the United States are vital to its implementation. Without American State Dept. financial and munitions support, Israel would cease to exist. And without near total American domination of the United Nations and the World Court, it is doubtful Israel would elude censure and reprimand for war crimes against that regions native population. All told, it is the disgrace of post-World War Two global society that this decades old slow bleed of the Palestinian Nation has continued unabated while the world defends their oppressors. The disparity of power, the humiliation of colonialism and the malevolence of racism are expressed as the negative effects of challenging European expansion wherever the frontier may be. Barack Obama calls it Jewish self-defence, Palestinians and Human Rights observers call it genocide.
I did not write this piece to defend the Honourable Min. Louis Farrakhan. His record of soulful representation of African America requires no defending from this writer. And I will not play the game of listing the probable offences attributed towards him. I refuse, as I stated at the outset of this article, to stab another person of colour publicly in the back. Divide and conquer will not work in this instance. And at the risk of being charged with anti-Semitism, I will make it clear here for the record that I respect Min. Farrakhan and any issues I have with his rhetorical record are between him, me and the rest of the African Diaspora. I will not denounce him because it is fashionable to do so nor will I reject him because we differ on various political issues. I recognise that Min. Farrakhan unlike his detractors has come a very long way in addressing the numerous concerns that have served to diminish and marginalise not just the African liberation movement but the African community as a whole. His tone and tremor have matured over the years and at this period in his life he has sought solidarity more than ever before with people and organisations several years ago many would have said was highly unlikely. His recent embracing and teaching of tolerance for our gay African brothers and sisters was a major step to repairing the Black family and increasing understanding on this very important issue. An optimistic and promising development overlooked by a White establishment that watched two young gay men killed within a week of each other on both coasts. The myth of White American tolerance for humanity in all its forms and its hypocritical record on the Homosexual civil right to protection from violence is glaringly damming. So is its history of legitimizing brutality towards the outsider. An initiative represented in every speech I have ever heard from the minister including the material detested by the American Jewish community.
I understand the context in which his commentary is made and his Jewish cynics understand it as well, thus the basis of their criticism in truth is not so much his choice of words but his intended critique of the Zionist misuse of White Christian guilt for their decidedly Judeophobic non-action as Semitic Europe literally burned alive. An understandable tactic given that new publications of the falsely believed Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion are still freely available and fervently referenced by xenophobes everywhere.
If Barack Obama and other Israel supporters were to articulate this issues fairly I would say so, but they do not. Obama is no different than any other American politician when it comes to pledging support for Israeli inhumanity. This, I cannot forgive and still remain human. While I still refuse to harm another POC by publicly quarrelling with them, I do not recognise Barack Obama as a ‘Black’ man. He does not act nor sound in any way shape or form like a Black man. He acts and sounds like what a White man thinks a Black man should act and sound. I was disposed, even eager, to give him the benefit of the doubt. But I also erred this way in regards to Clarence Thomas and General Colin Powell. I never could bring myself to trust the shoe-lady, current ineffectual Secretary of State Condi Rice. Her uninterrupted excursion to NYC during the drowning of hundreds of Africans and other poor people confirmed and justified my hesitation. Only Oprah Winfrey has done more to demonstrate that the American Negro is still seeking entry into the plantation house. Even if he or she has to step over the bodies of their own to reach the doorknob.
Barack Obama is exactly this sort of Negro. His church may be Black, but his heart is where the power structure is, deep within the White man’s fat capitalist backside. Only an Uncle Tom of the highest order could defend the murder of a defenceless, landless and speaking bluntly, beaten people. The hypocrisy of kowtowing to genocidal Zionist terrorism while simultaneously denouncing Minister Farrakhan for remarks made years ago in reference to Palestinian Arabs and African-Jewish relations in the United States says much about the man and his anticipated polices. Endless, racialised slaughters in the third world, genocides in the fourth world and rampant exploitation of the second world until peoples such as the Palestinians cease to exist in sufficient numbers to defend their right to land, cultural identity and political self-determination. So I ask humbly ask Barack Obama and all those who support his presidency, where is the accountability the liberal/democratic folks say Obama personifies? Where is the moral justice in mass murder in the name of American imperialist power? And when will White America admit that what Barack Obama really represents is a brown face that will make the genocide, the exploitation and the racism “legit” in the eyes of its victims?
Don’t pretend that Obama does not fully comprehend his role in this tragic comedy, he is intelligently playing his part with great aplomb and technique. He’s “clean” as the neo-con and liberal punditry like to point out. He has successfully shed the morose vestiges of his dark skin to reveal the psychosomatic White man within all of us cruelly moulded by European indifference to our reality.
Jefferson and Dr. Rush would stand proud. The America they visualized is finally coming to pass.
The Angryindian
