PUB: Call for Submissions: Sentinel Annual Literature Anthology 2012 (Nigeria/ Africa-wide) > Writers Afrika

Call for Submissions:

Sentinel Annual

Literature Anthology 2012

(Nigeria/ Africa-wide)


Deadline: 30 June 2012

Sentinel Annual Literature Anthology (SALA) is a yearly publication of new poetry, short fiction and plays by SPM Publications - the publishing division of Sentinel Poetry Movement.

SALA 2012: CALL FOR SUBMISSIONS

We are now accepting submissions of previously unpublished poems, short stories and short plays for publication in the Sentinel Annual Literature Anthology 2012.

Subject: Work submitted may be on any subject, and approached in any style, but the editors will be looking for materials that creatively engage some of the burning issues in the world today from health and economy, through terrorism, war, domestic violence to children's welfare, ethnic and religious issues. Nothing is out of bounds.

Lengths: Send no more than 6 poems up to 65 lines long, short stories must not be more than 3000 words long, and short plays up to 6,000 words long including title page and dramatis personnae.

Submission: Send your work as Word or RTF attachment (NO PDFs PLEASE), together with your current biograhical information up to 100 words to sala@sentinelpoetry.org.uk

Closing date for submissions: 30th June, 2012

Proposed date of publication: 1st November, 2012

Payment: There is no financial payment for authors. Every author published will receive 1 contributor's copy. Authors published who have their own websites are welcome to sell the book from their sites and remit only 75% of the cover price to us. We will fulfil all orders. We can provide websites for authors who don't currently have their own websites. Conditions apply.

SALA 2011

The first book in the SALA series published in November 2011 was edited by Unoma Azuah, author of Sky-High Flames, and Edible Bones (Poems), Amanda Sington-Williams, author of The Eloquence of Desire (Short Stories), and Nnorom Azuonye, author of Letter to God & Other Poems and The Bridge Selection (Plays). The book also features additional poems chosen by Roger Elkin, author of Fixing Things and Blood Brothers, from the Sentinel Annual Poetry Competition (2010) of which he was judge.

Works featured in SALA have been contributed by authors from Hong Kong, Nigeria, the USA, Australia and the United Kingdom among other countries. Here we have an exciting mix of voices dealing with issues from everyday to the unusual.

Authors featured include: Nicholas Y.B. Wong, Byron Beynon, Hajo Isa, Rusyan Sopian, Nsuhoridem Okon, Abigail George, Katie McDermott, Zino Asalor, Nike Adesuyi, Unoma Azuah, Angel Propps, Amanda Sington-Williams, Mel Ross-Macdonald, Jill Richter, Tendai Tshakisani Makavani, Michael Spring, Catherine Smith, Callum Patrick Hughes, Angela Amalonye Nwosu, Nnorom Azuonye, Hannah Lowe, Gary Smillie, Derek Sellen, W.F. Lantry, Christian Ward, Wally Smith, Jane Moreton, Carolyn King, Jonathan Davidson, and Paul Groves.

CONTACT INFORMATION:

For inquiries: sala@sentinelpoetry.org.uk

For submissions: sala@sentinelpoetry.org.uk

Website: http://www.sentinelpoetry.org.uk

 

PUB: Tourism Queensland/ ProBlogger Blogging Competition (worldwide) > Writers Afrika

Tourism Queensland/ProBlogger

Blogging Competition (worldwide)


Deadline: 17 April 2012

Ten lucky bloggers will win a five-day, all-expenses paid trip to Queensland, Australia including return economy-class air tickets, accommodation, excursions to some of Queensland’s bucket-list attractions like the Great Barrier Reef, meals, and two close-encounter workshops with me. The event will run from June 5 until June 10, 2012, not including travel time.

In return for seeing some amazing sights, tasting some modern Aussie tucker (food), and meeting some wonderful characters, we’ll put aside time for you to create content (a minimum of two blog posts complemented by tweets, videos, photography, status updates, or podcasts) for you to share with your audience. The content will later be featured on the Tourism Queensland blog.

Please note that this prize is open only to bloggers over the age of 18.

TERMS & CONDITIONS

By submitting an entry, you shall be deemed to have accepted the following terms and conditions.

1. Entries which do not fulfil the criteria will be rejected. For the purposes of the competition, an “Entrant” is defined broadly to include any blogger. Entrants must meet the following eligibility criteria:

(i) Entrants must be over the age of 18 years.

(ii) Entrants must not be engaged in any illegal or immoral activities which are likely to bring Tourism Queensland or its partners into disrepute.

(iii) entries will not be accepted from Tourism Queensland’s partners, sponsors and other agencies associated with the competition.

(iv) all winning Entrants will require good physical and mental health to undertake the activities on offer.

(v) all Entrants must have a solid understanding of the English language to understand and undertake activities covered in the workshops.

2. To enter the competition, you must submit your entry with your contact details to the competition website at ProBlogger.net/queensland-entries

3. The competition opens at 07.05 Australian Eastern Standard Time (AEST) on Tuesday 3rd April 2012 and closes at 23.59 (AEST) on Tuesday 17th April, 2012. Any entries received by ProBlogger or Tourism Queensland after the closing time, including delayed or misdirected entries, or entries which are not received due to server function or technical difficulties, will not be accepted.

4. Entrants may submit only one entry to be eligible.

5. Selection of the best final 10 Entrants will be declared winners by a panel of judges selected by Tourism Queensland. The panel’s decision is final and no correspondence will be entered into concerning the selection process.

6. The Top 10 winners will be contacted by telephone or email on Tuesday, 24th April, 2012 (AEST) by a Tourism Queensland representative.

7. All winning Entrants must confirm their attendance to the Tourism Queensland Problogger Great Barrier Reef Event (“the Event”) by 27th April, 2012 or the judging panel may review the decision at the discretion of Tourism Queensland.

8. The Event is scheduled to occur from June 5 – June 10, 2012, however this is subject to change at Tourism Queensland’s discretion and hotel availability. These dates exclude travel time to and from Queensland, Australia.

9. The prize must be taken at the nominated time and pre and post touring extensions will not be permitted. Any changes to the flight arrangements once confirmed, must be borne by the individual.

10. Winning Entrants must be present in Queensland for the entire itinerary period from June 5 until June 10, 2012. The prize includes:

(i) return travel for the winners from their nearest international airport to Queensland by carrier/s to be nominated by Tourism Queensland.

(ii) all accommodation, ground transfers and main meals for the duration of the itinerary by a selection of providers to be nominated by Tourism Queensland.

(iii) two blogging workshops conducted in English language, requiring a working knowledge of the language.

(iv) two days of adventure in Cairns and the Great Barrier Reef.

(v) various experiences, day tours, activities and most entertainment.

CONTACT INFORMATION:

For submissions: use the entry form here

Website: http://www.tq.com.au/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PUB: The Ledge

THE LEDGE MAGAZINE

 

2012 Poetry Awards Competition

 

PRIZES: First prize: $1,000 and publication in The Ledge Magazine. Second prize: $250 and publication in The Ledge Magazine. Third prize: $100 and publication in The Ledge Magazine.

ENTRY FEE: $12 for the first three (3) poems; $3 for each additional poem. $20 subscription (two issues) to The Ledge gains free entry for the first three poems.

NO RESTRICTIONS on form or content. The Ledge is open to all styles and schools of poetry. Excellence is the only criterion.

ALL POEMS must be previously unpublished. Simultaneous submissions are acceptable but we must be notified if your poem(s) is accepted elsewhere for publication. All poems will also be considered for publication in The Ledge Magazine.

PLEASE include your name, mailing address and email address with each entry. Please also enclose a SASE for the competition results or manuscript return.

POSTMARK DEADLINE: April 30, 2012.

SEND ENTRIES TO:

The Ledge 2012 PoetryAwards Competition
40 Maple Avenue
Bellport , NY 11713

 




2012 Poetry Chapbook Competition

 

PRIZE: Winning poet will receive a $1,000 cash award and 25 copies of the published chapbook.

SUBMIT: 16-28 pages of original poetry with title page, biographical note and acknowledgements, if any. Please include your name, mailing address, email address, and phone number (optional). Simultaneous submissions are accepted, but we ask that you notify us if your manuscript is accepted elsewhere. Poets may enter more than one manuscript.

ENTRY FEE: $18. All entrants will receive a copy of the winning chapbook upon its publication in the fall of 2013.

NO RESTRICTIONS on form or content. The Ledge Press is open to all styles and forms of poetry. Excellence is the only criterion.

PLEASE include a SASE for the competition results or manuscript return.

POSTMARK DEADLINE: October 31, 2012.

SEND ENTRIES TO:

The Ledge 2012 Chapbook Competition
40 Maple Avenue
Bellport, NY 11713

 

 

 

 

 

VIDEO: Scandal Premiere Draws Mixed Reviews, What Did You Think? > Clutch Magazine

Kerry Washington

Scandal Premiere

Draws Mixed Reviews,

What Did You Think?

Monday Apr 9, 2012 – by

 

Kerry Washington’s new show Scandal, created by Shonda Rhimes, just might be the first television show on a major network both created by and starring a black woman (if you can think of another one let us know!). That fact alone made many of us tune in to see if the show has hopes for becoming a solid part of ABC’s Thursday lineup. Critics seem split on the effectiveness of the show. Matt Zoller Seitz at NY Mag trashed the show and likened it to a bag of potato chips. Maureen Ryan at Huffington Post called it an “efficient” effort following the Shonda Rhimes formula but promised to give it more of a chance. Meanwhile, Tambay Obensen atthe black film site Shadow and Act wrote that the show was engaging and he’d like to see more. Do you see a bit of a pattern here?

The reality of it is, Kerry Washington is a black lead and that will always effect reviews and viewership. It’s great to read every and any opinion on the show that’s out there, but I’ve already noticed a difference between what black viewers are saying about Scandal and what the mainstream media is saying. I thought it was sharp and I look forward to watching more, and it seems that many others agree, but will it be enough to keep this show on the air?

If you didn’t catch Scandal, both last week’s episode and the one scheduled for this Thursday are on Hulu.com.
 

Did you watch Scandal? Do we love it?

 

OP-ED: Playing the Violence Card - NYTimes

Op-Ed Contributor

Playing the Violence Card

    EVER since the culture wars of the 1980s, Americans have been familiar with “the race card” — an epithet used to discredit real and imagined cries of racism. Less familiar, however, is an equally cynical rhetorical tactic that I call “the violence card.”
    Topos Graphics

    Here’s how it works. When confronted with an instance of racially charged violence against a black person, a commentator draws attention to the fact that there is much more black-on-black violence than white-on-black violence. To play the violence card — as many criminal-justice advocates have done since the Rodney King police brutality case of the early 1990s — is to suggest that black people should worry more about the harm they do to themselves and less about how victimized they are by others.

    The national outrage over the Trayvon Martin case has prompted some recent examples. Last week, the journalist Juan Williams wrote in The Wall Street Journal of the “tragedy” of Trayvon’s death but wondered “what about all the other young black murder victims? Nationally, nearly half of all murder victims are black. And the overwhelming majority of those black people are killed by other black people.” During a debate about the case on Sunday on an ABC News program, the commentator George F. Will argued that the “root fact” is that “about 150 black men are killed every week in this country — and 94 percent of them by other black men.”

    For Mr. Williams, Mr. Will and countless others playing the violence card, the real issue has little to do with racist fears or police practices — even though those would seem to be the very issues at hand.

    It’s true that black-on-black violence is an exceptionally grave problem. But this does not explain the allure of the violence card, which perpetuates the reassuring notion that violence against black people is not society’s concern but rather a problem for black people to fix on their own. The implication is that the violence that afflicts black America reflects a failure of lower-class black culture, a breakdown of personal responsibility, a pathological trait of a criminally inclined subgroup — not a problem with social and institutional roots that needs to be addressed through collective effort well beyond the boundaries of black communities.

    But perhaps the large scale of black-on-black violence justifies playing the violence card? Not if you recall how Americans responded to high levels of white-on-white violence in the past.

    Consider the crime waves of 1890 to 1930, when millions of poor European immigrants came to America only to be trapped in inner-city slums, suffering the effects of severe economic inequality and social marginalization. Around the turn of the century, the Harvard economist William Ripley described the national scene: “The horde now descending upon our shores is densely ignorant, yet dull and superstitious withal; lawless, with a disposition to criminality.” But the solution, Ripley argued, was not stigma, isolation and the promotion of fear. “They are fellow passengers on our ship of state,” he wrote, “and the health of the nation depends upon the preservation of the vitality of the lower classes.”

    As a spokesman for saving white immigrant communities from the violence within, Ripley was part of a national progressive movement led by Jane Addams, the influential social worker of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. In the face of grisly, gang-related youth shootings — “duplicated almost every morning,” Addams wrote — she insisted that everyone from the elite to community organizers to police officers had a part to play.

    She and other progressives mobilized institutional resources to save killers and the future victims of killers. Violent white neighborhoods were flooded with social workers, police reformers and labor activists committed to creating better jobs and building a social welfare net. White-on-white violence fell slowly but steadily in proportion to economic development and crime prevention.

    In almost every way the opposite situation applied to black Americans. Instead of provoking a steady dose of compassionate progressivism, crime and violence in black communities fueled the racist belief that, as numerous contemporaries stated, blacks were their “own worst enemies” — an early version of the violence card. Black people were “criminalized” through various institutions and practices, whether Southern chain gangs, prison farms, convict lease camps and lynching bees or Northern anti-black neighborhood violence and race riots.

    Racial criminalization has continued to this day, stigmatizing black people as dangerous, legitimizing or excusing white-on-black violence, conflating crime and poverty with blackness, and perpetuating punitive notions of “justice” — vigilante violence, stop-and-frisk racial profiling and mass incarceration — as the only legitimate responses.

    But the past does not have to be the future. The violence card is a cynical ploy that will only contribute to more fear, more black alienation and more violence. Rejecting its skewed logic and embracing a compassionate progressive solution for black crime is our best hope for saving lives and ensuring that young men like Trayvon Martin do not die in vain.

    Khalil Gibran Muhammad, director of the Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture at the New York Public Library, is the author of “The Condemnation of Blackness: Race, Crime, and the Making of Modern Urban America.”

     

    POLICE BRUTALITY: Kendrec McDade Shooting

    FBI Investigating

    Possible Violations in the

    Kendrec McDade Shooting

    Monday Apr 9, 2012 – by

    Kendrec McDade and his newborn brother

    Last week we told you about the shooting death of 19-year-old college student Kendrec McDade who was shot and killed by the Pasadena PD last month. After questions surfaced about the shooting, the FBI has decided to take a look into the case to see whether or not the police violated McDade’s rights.

    McDade was shot and killed on March 24 after being pursued by the police for an alleged robbery. After Oscar Carrillo told 911 operators he was robbed at gunpoint by two men, they spotted McDade and a friend and began chasing them. During the chase, police claim they thought McDade reached for his waistband and they shot him multiple times.

    After the shooting and subsequent investigation that found that McDade didn’t have a weapon or the stolen laptop Carrillo claims the pair took from his car, police arrested Carrillo and charged him with Involuntary Manslaughter after he admitted that he lied to the 911 operator about McDade and his friend having a gun. Now, a new witness has come forward claiming police never identified themselves as they chased McDade and his 17-year-old friend.

    Anthony Carroll, 20, told the Pasadena Star-News: ”I thought it was a drug deal gone bad, that’s how quiet it was,” Carroll said. “I didn’t hear a siren until the shooting happened.”

    McDade’s family urged federal officials to take a look at his case and have filed a lawsuit against the Pasadena PD for, what they call, a pattern of abuse stemming from several officer-involved shootings.

    Responding to community outrage, Pasadena Police Chief Phillip Sanchez also invited federal officials to investigate McDade’s death, which is also being reviewed by the LA County District Attorney’s office and the LA County Office of Independent Review.

    __________________________

     

    Police Blame Man

    Whose 911 Call

    Led Cops to

    Kill Unarmed Black Teen

     

     

    Funeral services were held Saturday for 19-year-old Kendrec McDade, who was shot and killed by Pasadena, California police on March 24. Police say they thought McDade was armed, so they shot him when he reached for his waistband but McDade was unarmed, he never had a gun.

    The complicated sequence of events started out with a 911 call from Oscar Carrillo, 26, who told the dispatcher his laptop was stolen at gunpoint by two armed men.

    “Eh, miss, two guys just stole my backpack. They put a gun on my face right now,” Carrillo told the 911 operator. “I’m on Raymond and Orange Grove. They just run away.”

    Carrillo later admitted that the suspects were not armed and had taken his property out of his car. He said he told police the suspects had guns in order to get officers to respond faster.

    Now Pasadena Police want to charge Carrillo with involuntary manslaughter.

    “The actions of the 911 caller set the minds of the officers,” Pasadena Police Chief Philip Sanchez said at a press conference shortly after the shooting.

    Carrillo was briefly jailed while police investigated whether he could be charged with involuntary manslaughter but was released days later. The Los Angeles County district attorney has, so far, declined to file charges against Carrillo.

    He does however have a different type of punishment already. Carillo, who is the father of two U.S. born children, is undocumented and now has a deportation order placed on him.

    Carrillo’s deportation order has been postponed, at the request of Pasadena police, until the cop shooting investigation is complete, ICE spokeswoman Virginia Kice told a KNBC in Los Angeles.

    Caree Harper, an attorney representing McDade’s family, told the AP that arresting Carrillo may be an attempt by police to shift blame away from the officers. Harper added that Carrillo should be prosecuted for filing a false police report.

    Assemblywoman Holly Mitchell, D-Los Angeles, also told the AP that like the Trayvon Martin case, the Pasadena shooting highlights the need for a continuing discussion about racial profiling.

    “The bigger picture is bias and racism,” said Mitchell, secretary of the Legislative Black Caucus. “And while the particulars of the two cases may be different — while the perpetrator who actually fired the weapon may be different — the fact of the matter is two young black men are dead.”

    “However, he didn’t pull the trigger and the officers can use discretion,” she said. “They can’t blame the caller because they shot an unarmed black man.”

    On Friday the FBI announced it will open a civil rights investigation on the shooting of McDade’s case. 

     

     

     

    ACTION: Trayvon Martin—Sign of the Times - Walk Together People, Don't Get Weary

    Sources Say Zimmerman

    Could be Arrested This Week

    WFTV.com on Monday reported that two different sources have said Trayvon Martin’s killer George Zimmerman could be arrested this week, and that a Grand Jury will not meet on Tuesday.

    Trayvon Martin Investigation

    Special prosecutor Angela Corey on Monday also said she will not take the Trayvon Martin shooting death before a grand jury.

    Corey told the AP she continues to investigate the case and will not involve a grand jury that had been set to meet Tuesday in Sanford, Fla.

    AP with more details:

    Corey said her decision to skip the grand jury shouldn’t be considered a factor in determining whether charges will be filed against George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch volunteer who has admitted to fatally shooting the unarmed Martin.

    The announcement means the decision on charges now rests solely with Corey, who had a reputation for not presenting cases before grand juries if it wasn’t required. Under Florida law, only first-degree murder cases require the use of grand juries.

    Corey took over the case last month after the prosecutor who normally handles cases out of Sanford recused himself. That prosecutor, Norm Wolfinger, had originally called for the case to be presented before a grand jury.

    “From the moment she was assigned, Ms. Corey noted she may not need a grand jury,” said a statement from Corey’s office.

     

    __________________________

     

     

     

     

    Racist Trayvon Martin sign

    spotted outside of Detroit

    By Jay Scott Smith

    10:39 AM on 04/09/2012

    Racist Trayvon Martin sign spotted outside of Detroit

     

    DEARBORN, Mich. - Michigan State Police and Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) officials are trying to determine how an electronic road was changed to display a racist message about Trayvon Martin. The sign, which was located along I-94, at the border of Detroit and Dearborn, said "Trayvon is a Ni**er" and was discovered just before 1 a.m. on Monday morning.

    "We were first notified at about 12:05 a.m. of the inappropriate message," said Rob Morosi, anMDOT spokesman, "Immediately, we dispatched crews to verify that the message had been changed, and it was removed by 12:45 a.m. and replaced with the proper message.

    Morosi said that someone hacked into a portable electronic sign that was attached to a trailer and was able to change the message. He said that the person who changed it was able to access the password controls to make the quick change.

    "The sign is there as part of a big project we have at the I-94/M-39 interchange," Morosi said. "Calls were coming in from motorists who were shocked, disturbed and every emotion you can imagine. The portable sign has a panel that was broken into. The message was changed and the keyboard was actually stolen."

    There is an investigation pending, and Michigan State Police will check surveillance footage to see how the sign was hacked and by who. Sign pranks like this are often common at this time of year, with many of them harmlessly referencing aliens, UFOs, or Santa Claus. This was a case where a "computer savvy" individual was able to spread a hate-filled message.

    "We've had instances before where we've had some quirky messages regarding aliens and goblins," Morosi said. "But rarely anything to this level of hatred that was depicted."
    This is the second such incident involving racial slurs on a digital MDOT sign in a year.

    On April 8, 2011, an MDOT sign in Ypsilanti, near Eastern Michigan University, was hacked and the message "God Hates Ni**ers" was displayed for hours before authorities removed it.

    This incident also comes days after someone spray-painted "Long Live Zimmerman" on the Hale Black Cultural Center at Ohio State University. That incident led to demonstrations by black students at Ohio State over the weekend.

    Morosi applauded the efforts of MDOT workers and their quick response to remove the slur from the sign considering the time of night and that most workers were off for the Easter holiday. He noted that better safeguards will be put in place to prevent things like this from happening in the future.

    "We hope that people understand that message boards are meant to be a public service warning drivers about upcoming work zones, closed ramps and things of that nature," Morosi said. "We hope people are as offended by it as we were."

    Follow Jay Scott Smith on Twitter at @JayScottSmith

    >via: http://www.thegrio.com/specials/trayvon-martin/racist-trayvon-martin-sign-spo...

     

    __________________________

     

    Teacher Fired over

    Trayvon Martin Fundraiser


     

    What do you do with a teacher who provides students with authentic learning opportunities? A teacher who invests her own resources to support students? A teacher who was voted Teacher of the Year two of the last three years?

    If you’re Superintendent Jacqueline Cassell at the Pontiac Academy for Excellence Middle School in Pontiac, Mich., you fire her.

    When Brooke Harris contacted us last week, her first concern was not her career—it was her students. She worried that she had let them down by not fighting harder for her job. She worried that their essays onTrayvon Martin would no longer be included in the school newspaper. She worried that the superintendent in charge of their education would continue to underestimate them.

    We’re worried about Brooke’s students too. 

    Last month Brooke Harris’ eighth-grade class asked her about the “kid who was killed over some skittles;” she seized the opportunity to bring her students’ lived experiences into the classroom—a strategy we and other experts advocate.

    Brooke’s students identify with Trayvon Martin. Many of them are African American. Many have been stopped by police who thought they looked suspicious.

    In fact, her students engaged so deeply with the issue that they asked to take it beyond essays and class discussions—they wanted to take action to help Trayvon’s family.

    They, like many students across the nation, wanted to show their support by wearing hoodies. Each student who participated would pay $1. Proceeds would be donated to Trayvon’s family.

    Again, Brooke saw a teachable moment. She and her students began the formal process of organizing a school event. Students wrote persuasive letters to the principal and superintendent. Brooke and a co-worker filed the necessary paperwork. The principal immediately signed off on the fundraiser.

    Superintendent Cassell was less enthusiastic. She refused to approve the proposal, despite having supported many other “dress down” fundraisers. Brooke’s students took the disappointment in stride, but asked to present their idea to Cassell in person.

    And that’s when things got weird.

    Brooke asked that a few of her students be allowed to attend her meeting with Cassell. Outraged by the request, Cassell suspended Brooke for two days. The explanation given—she was being paid to teach, not to be an activist.

    Those two days morphed into a two-week, unpaid suspension when Brooke briefly stopped by the afterschool literacy fair (she had previously organized) to drop off prizes (paid for with her own money) and to pick up materials for several students whose parents were unable to attend. Supporting her students was insubordination.

    The final offense? Brooke asked Cassell to clarify her original transgression so she could learn from her mistake. Cassell referred her to the minutes of their first meeting. Still confused, Brooke again requested an explanation. Cassell fired her.

    The Pontiac Academy for Excellence is a nonunionized charter school. According to Superintendent Cassell, Brooke’s contract makes no provisions for formal appeal, and Michigan is an “at will” employment state. What does this mean to Brooke? She has no right to an explanation of why she was fired. She just was.

    There is a reason Michigan’s English Language Proficiency Standards call for students to “engage in challenging and purposeful learning that blends their experiences with content knowledge and real-world applications.” Students learn better this way.

    Real life is not clean. It is not clear cut. It is not safe. But it is the world our students live in and they will be required to navigate it as adults. Teachers must bring this outside world into the classroom.

    The only way this will ever happen is if we create an environment in which teachers feel safe discussing controversial issues with their students. Stories like Brooke’s are outrageous in their own right, but even worse, they create an atmosphere of fear among teachers.

    This fear is choking our educational system, but we can pry its fingers loose if we work together. In Brooke’s forced absence, her students held their own, unsanctioned hoodie day. They made their voices heard over the fear. So can you.

    Sign our change.org petition calling for Brooke Harris’ reinstatement at the Pontiac Academy for Excellence Middle School and tell administrators we will not tolerate the silencing of our nation’s best teachers.

    Pettway is associate editor for Teaching Tolerance.

    __________________________

     

    Trayvon Martin killing:

    UN human rights chief

    calls for investigation


    UN Human Rights chief Navi Pillay has called for an "immediate investigation" into the circumstances surrounding the death of Trayvon Martin, the unarmed black teen who was shot dead by a volunteer neighbourhood watchman in Florida.

    The UN's human rights chief, Navi Pillay concludes that crimes against humanity are likely to have been committed in Syria. Photo: REUTERS

     

    Ms Pillay made the comments about the controversial case at a press conference in Barbados, as she wrapped up a three-day visit to the Caribbean island nation.

    "As High Commissioner for Human Rights, I call for an immediate investigation," she said.

    "Justice must be done for the victim. It's not just this individual case. It calls into question the delivery of justice in all situations like this."

    Neighbourhood watch captain George Zimmerman, a white Hispanic, fatally shot 17-year-old Martin inside a gated community in the Florida town of Sanford on February 26.

    Mr Zimmerman has said he acted in self-defense after Martin punched him in the nose, knocked him down and slammed his head into the ground.

    The case has unleashed a national uproar over race relations and the right to self-defense in the United States.

    Ms Pillay expressed shock that Zimmerman was not arrested right away, and expressed concern about Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law, which allows the use of deadly force in situations where there is a belief of a threat.

    "The law should operate equally in respect of all violations. I will be awaiting an investigation and prosecution and trial and of course reparations for the victims concerned," Ms Pillay said.

    Since Martin's death, there have been numerous large public protests calling for Zimmerman's arrest, but there have been no detention orders and the 28-year-old has gone into hiding, fearing for his life.

     

    HISTORY: "You Are the Un-Americans, and You Ought to be Ashamed of Yourselves": Paul Robeson Appears Before HUAC

    Paul Robeson (April 9, 1898 – January 23, 1976)

    “You Are the Un-Americans,

    and You Ought to be Ashamed

    of Yourselves”:

    Paul Robeson

    Appears Before HUAC

    Many African-American witnesses subpoenaed to testify at the House Committee on Un-American Activities (HUAC) hearings in the 1950s were asked to denounce Paul Robeson (1888–1976) in order to obtain future employment. Robeson, an All-American football player and recipient of a Phi Beta Kappa key at Rutgers, received a law degree at Columbia. He became an internationally acclaimed concert performer and actor as well as a persuasive political speaker. In 1949, Robeson was the subject of controversy after newspapers reports of public statements that African Americans would not fight in “an imperialist war.” In 1950, his passport was revoked. Several years later, Robeson refused to sign an affidavit stating that he was not a Communist and initiated an unsuccessful lawsuit. In the following testimony to a HUAC hearing, ostensibly convened to gain information regarding his passport suit, Robeson refused to answer questions concerning his political activities and lectured bigoted Committee members Gordon H. Scherer and Chairman Francis E.Walter about African-American history and civil rights. In 1958, the Supreme Court ruled that a citizen’s right to travel could not be taken away without due process and Robeson’ passport was returned.


    Testimony of Paul Robeson before the House Committee on Un-American Activities, June 12, 1956

    THE CHAIRMAN: The Committee will be in order. This morning the Committee resumes its series of hearings on the vital issue of the use of American passports as travel documents in furtherance of the objectives of the Communist conspiracy. . . .

    Mr. ARENS: Now, during the course of the process in which you were applying for this passport, in July of 1954, were you requested to submit a non-Communist affidavit?

    Mr. ROBESON: We had a long discussion—with my counsel, who is in the room, Mr. [Leonard B.] Boudin—with the State Department, about just such an affidavit and I was very precise not only in the application but with the State Department, headed by Mr. Henderson and Mr. McLeod, that under no conditions would I think of signing any such affidavit, that it is a complete contradiction of the rights of American citizens.

    Mr. ARENS: Did you comply with the requests?

    Mr. ROBESON: I certainly did not and I will not.

    Mr. ARENS: Are you now a member of the Communist Party?

    Mr. ROBESON: Oh please, please, please.

    Mr. SCHERER: Please answer, will you, Mr. Robeson?

    Mr. ROBESON: What is the Communist Party? What do you mean by that?

    Mr. SCHERER: I ask that you direct the witness to answer the question.

    Mr. ROBESON: What do you mean by the Communist Party? As far as I know it is a legal party like the Republican Party and the Democratic Party. Do you mean a party of people who have sacrificed for my people, and for all Americans and workers, that they can live in dignity? Do you mean that party?

    Mr. ARENS: Are you now a member of the Communist Party?

    Mr. ROBESON: Would you like to come to the ballot box when I vote and take out the ballot and see?

    Mr. ARENS: Mr. Chairman, I respectfully suggest that the witness be ordered and directed to answer that question.

    THE CHAIRMAN: You are directed to answer the question.

    (The witness consulted with his counsel.)

    Mr. ROBESON: I stand upon the Fifth Amendment of the American Constitution.

    Mr. ARENS: Do you mean you invoke the Fifth Amendment?

    Mr. ROBESON: I invoke the Fifth Amendment.

    Mr. ARENS: Do you honestly apprehend that if you told this Committee truthfully—

    Mr. ROBESON: I have no desire to consider anything. I invoke the Fifth Amendment, and it is none of your business what I would like to do, and I invoke the Fifth Amendment. And forget it.

    THE CHAIRMAN: You are directed to answer that question.

    MR, ROBESON: I invoke the Fifth Amendment, and so I am answering it, am I not?

    Mr. ARENS: I respectfully suggest the witness be ordered and directed to answer the question as to whether or not he honestly apprehends, that if he gave us a truthful answer to this last principal question, he would be supplying information which might be used against him in a criminal proceeding.

    (The witness consulted with his counsel.)

    THE CHAIRMAN: You are directed to answer that question, Mr. Robeson.

    Mr. ROBESON: Gentlemen, in the first place, wherever I have been in the world, Scandinavia, England, and many places, the first to die in the struggle against Fascism were the Communists and I laid many wreaths upon graves of Communists. It is not criminal, and the Fifth Amendment has nothing to do with criminality. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Warren, has been very clear on that in many speeches, that the Fifth Amendment does not have anything to do with the inference of criminality. I invoke the Fifth Amendment.

    Mr. ARENS: Have you ever been known under the name of “John Thomas”?

    Mr. ROBESON: Oh, please, does somebody here want—are you suggesting—do you want me to be put up for perjury some place? “John Thomas”! My name is Paul Robeson, and anything I have to say, or stand for, I have said in public all over the world, and that is why I am here today.

    Mr. SCHERER: I ask that you direct the witness to answer the question. He is making a speech.

    Mr. FRIEDMAN: Excuse me, Mr. Arens, may we have the photographers take their pictures, and then desist, because it is rather nerve-racking for them to be there.

    THE CHAIRMAN: They will take the pictures.

    Mr. ROBESON: I am used to it and I have been in moving pictures. Do you want me to pose for it good? Do you want me to smile? I cannot smile when I am talking to him.

    Mr. ARENS: I put it to you as a fact, and ask you to affirm or deny the fact, that your Communist Party name was “John Thomas.”

    Mr. ROBESON: I invoke the Fifth Amendment. This is really ridiculous.

    Mr. ARENS: Now, tell this Committee whether or not you know Nathan Gregory Silvermaster.

    Mr. SCHERER: Mr. Chairman, this is not a laughing matter.

    Mr. ROBESON: It is a laughing matter to me, this is really complete nonsense.

    Mr. ARENS: Have you ever known Nathan Gregory Silvermaster?

    (The witness consulted with his counsel.)

    Mr. ROBESON: I invoke the Fifth Amendment.

    Mr. ARENS: Do you honestly apprehend that if you told whether you know Nathan Gregory Silvermaster you would be supplying information that could be used against you in a criminal proceeding?

    Mr. ROBESON: I have not the slightest idea what you are talking about. I invoke the Fifth—

    Mr. ARENS: I suggest, Mr. Chairman, that the witness be directed to answer that question.

    THE CHAIRMAN: You are directed to answer the question.

    Mr. ROBESON: I invoke the Fifth.

    Mr. SCHERER: The witness talks very loud when he makes a speech, but when he invokes the Fifth Amendment I cannot hear him.

    Mr. ROBESON: I invoked the Fifth Amendment very loudly. You know I am an actor, and I have medals for diction.

    . . . .

    Mr. ROBESON: Oh, gentlemen, I thought I was here about some passports.

    Mr. ARENS: We will get into that in just a few moments.

    Mr. ROBESON: This is complete nonsense.

    . . . .

    THE CHAIRMAN: This is legal. This is not only legal but usual. By a unanimous vote, this Committee has been instructed to perform this very distasteful task.

    Mr. ROBESON: To whom am I talking?

    THE CHAIRMAN: You are speaking to the Chairman of this Committee.

    Mr. ROBESON: Mr. Walter?

    THE CHAIRMAN: Yes.

    Mr. ROBESON: The Pennsylvania Walter?

    THE CHAIRMAN: That is right.

    Mr. ROBESON: Representative of the steelworkers?

    THE CHAIRMAN: That is right.

    Mr. ROBESON: Of the coal-mining workers and not United States Steel, by any chance? A great patriot.

    THE CHAIRMAN: That is right.

    Mr. ROBESON: You are the author of all of the bills that are going to keep all kinds of decent people out of the country.

    THE CHAIRMAN: No, only your kind.

    Mr. ROBESON: Colored people like myself, from the West Indies and all kinds. And just the Teutonic Anglo-Saxon stock that you would let come in.

    THE CHAIRMAN: We are trying to make it easier to get rid of your kind, too.

    Mr. ROBESON: You do not want any colored people to come in?

    THE CHAIRMAN: Proceed. . . .

    Mr. ROBESON: Could I say that the reason that I am here today, you know, from the mouth of the State Department itself, is: I should not be allowed to travel because I have struggled for years for the independence of the colonial peoples of Africa. For many years I have so labored and I can say modestly that my name is very much honored all over Africa, in my struggles for their independence. That is the kind of independence like Sukarno got in Indonesia. Unless we are double-talking, then these efforts in the interest of Africa would be in the same context. The other reason that I am here today, again from the State Department and from the court record of the court of appeals, is that when I am abroad I speak out against the injustices against the Negro people of this land. I sent a message to the Bandung Conference and so forth. That is why I am here. This is the basis, and I am not being tried for whether I am a Communist, I am being tried for fighting for the rights of my people, who are still second-class citizens in this United States of America. My mother was born in your state, Mr. Walter, and my mother was a Quaker, and my ancestors in the time of Washington baked bread for George Washington’s troops when they crossed the Delaware, and my own father was a slave. I stand here struggling for the rights of my people to be full citizens in this country. And they are not. They are not in Mississippi. And they are not in Montgomery, Alabama. And they are not in Washington. They are nowhere, and that is why I am here today. You want to shut up every Negro who has the courage to stand up and fight for the rights of his people, for the rights of workers, and I have been on many a picket line for the steelworkers too. And that is why I am here today. . . .

    Mr. ARENS: Did you make a trip to Europe in 1949 and to the Soviet Union?

    Mr. ROBESON: Yes, I made a trip. To England. And I sang.

    Mr. ARENS: Where did you go?

    Mr. ROBESON: I went first to England, where I was with the Philadelphia Orchestra, one of two American groups which was invited to England. I did a long concert tour in England and Denmark and Sweden, and I also sang for the Soviet people, one of the finest musical audiences in the world. Will you read what the Porgy and Bess people said? They never heard such applause in their lives. One of the most musical peoples in the world, and the great composers and great musicians, very cultured people, and Tolstoy, and—

    THE CHAIRMAN: We know all of that.

    Mr. ROBESON: They have helped our culture and we can learn a lot.

    Mr. ARENS: Did you go to Paris on that trip?

    Mr. ROBESON: I went to Paris.

    Mr. ARENS: And while you were in Paris, did you tell an audience there that the American Negro would never go to war against the Soviet government?

    Mr. ROBESON: May I say that is slightly out of context? May I explain to you what I did say? I remember the speech very well, and the night before, in London, and do not take the newspaper, take me: I made the speech, gentlemen, Mr. So-and-So. It happened that the night before, in London, before I went to Paris . . . and will you please listen?

    Mr. ARENS: We are listening.

    Mr. ROBESON: Two thousand students from various parts of the colonial world, students who since then have become very important in their governments, in places like Indonesia and India, and in many parts of Africa, two thousand students asked me and Mr. [Dr. Y. M.] Dadoo, a leader of the Indian people in South Africa, when we addressed this conference, and remember I was speaking to a peace conference, they asked me and Mr. Dadoo to say there that they were struggling for peace, that they did not want war against anybody. Two thousand students who came from populations that would range to six or seven hundred million people.

    Mr. KEARNEY: Do you know anybody who wants war?

    Mr. ROBESON: They asked me to say in their name that they did not want war. That is what I said. No part of my speech made in Paris says fifteen million American Negroes would do anything. I said it was my feeling that the American people would struggle for peace, and that has since been underscored by the President of these United States. Now, in passing, I said—

    Mr. KEARNEY: Do you know of any people who want war?

    Mr. ROBESON: Listen to me. I said it was unthinkable to me that any people would take up arms, in the name of an Eastland, to go against anybody. Gentlemen, I still say that. This United States Government should go down to Mississippi and protect my people. That is what should happen.

    THE CHAIRMAN: Did you say what was attributed to you?

    Mr. ROBESON: I did not say it in that context.

    Mr. ARENS: I lay before you a document containing an article, “I Am Looking for Full Freedom,” by Paul Robeson, in a publication called the Worker, dated July 3, 1949.

    At the Paris Conference I said it was unthinkable that the Negro people of America or elsewhere in the world could be drawn into war with the Soviet Union.

    Mr. ROBESON: Is that saying the Negro people would do anything? I said it is unthinkable. I did not say that there [in Paris]: I said that in the Worker.

    Mr. ARENS:

    I repeat it with hundredfold emphasis: they will not.

    Did you say that?

    Mr. ROBESON: I did not say that in Paris, I said that in America. And, gentlemen, they have not yet done so, and it is quite clear that no Americans, no people in the world probably, are going to war with the Soviet Union. So I was rather prophetic, was I not?

    Mr. ARENS: On that trip to Europe, did you go to Stockholm?

    Mr. ROBESON: I certainly did, and I understand that some people in the American Embassy tried to break up my concert. They were not successful.

    Mr. ARENS: While you were in Stockholm, did you make a little speech?

    Mr. ROBESON: I made all kinds of speeches, yes.

    Mr. ARENS: Let me read you a quotation.

    Mr. ROBESON: Let me listen.

    Mr. ARENS: Do so, please.

    Mr. ROBESON: I am a lawyer.

    Mr. KEARNEY: It would be a revelation if you would listen to counsel.

    Mr. ROBESON: In good company, I usually listen, but you know people wander around in such fancy places. Would you please let me read my statement at some point?

    THE CHAIRMAN: We will consider your statement.

    Mr. ARENS:

    I do not hesitate one second to state clearly and unmistakably: I belong to the American resistance movement which fights against American imperialism, just as the resistance movement fought against Hitler.

    Mr. ROBESON: Just like Frederick Douglass and Harriet Tubman were underground railroaders, and fighting for our freedom, you bet your life.

    THE CHAIRMAN: I am going to have to insist that you listen to these questions.

    MR, ROBESON: I am listening.

    Mr. ARENS:

    If the American warmongers fancy that they could win America’s millions of Negroes for a war against those countries (i.e., the Soviet Union and the peoples‘ democracies) then they ought to understand that this will never be the case. Why should the Negroes ever fight against the only nations of the world where racial discrimination is prohibited, and where the people can live freely? Never! I can assure you, they will never fight against either the Soviet Union or the peoples’ democracies.

    Did you make that statement?

    Mr. ROBESON: I do not remember that. But what is perfectly clear today is that nine hundred million other colored people have told you that they will not. Four hundred million in India, and millions everywhere, have told you, precisely, that the colored people are not going to die for anybody: they are going to die for their independence. We are dealing not with fifteen million colored people, we are dealing with hundreds of millions.

    Mr. KEARNEY: The witness has answered the question and he does not have to make a speech. . . .

    Mr. ROBESON: In Russia I felt for the first time like a full human being. No color prejudice like in Mississippi, no color prejudice like in Washington. It was the first time I felt like a human being. Where I did not feel the pressure of color as I feel [it] in this Committee today.

    Mr. SCHERER: Why do you not stay in Russia?

    Mr. ROBESON: Because my father was a slave, and my people died to build this country, and I am going to stay here, and have a part of it just like you. And no Fascist-minded people will drive me from it. Is that clear? I am for peace with the Soviet Union, and I am for peace with China, and I am not for peace or friendship with the Fascist Franco, and I am not for peace with Fascist Nazi Germans. I am for peace with decent people.

    Mr. SCHERER: You are here because you are promoting the Communist cause.

    Mr. ROBESON: I am here because I am opposing the neo-Fascist cause which I see arising in these committees. You are like the Alien [and] Sedition Act, and Jefferson could be sitting here, and Frederick Douglass could be sitting here, and Eugene Debs could be here.

    . . . .

    THE CHAIRMAN: Now, what prejudice are you talking about? You were graduated from Rutgers and you were graduated from the University of Pennsylvania. I remember seeing you play football at Lehigh.

    Mr. ROBESON: We beat Lehigh.

    THE CHAIRMAN: And we had a lot of trouble with you.

    Mr. ROBESON: That is right. DeWysocki was playing in my team.

    THE CHAIRMAN: There was no prejudice against you. Why did you not send your son to Rutgers?

    Mr. ROBESON: Just a moment. This is something that I challenge very deeply, and very sincerely: that the success of a few Negroes, including myself or Jackie Robinson can make up—and here is a study from Columbia University—for seven hundred dollars a year for thousands of Negro families in the South. My father was a slave, and I have cousins who are sharecroppers, and I do not see my success in terms of myself. That is the reason my own success has not meant what it should mean: I have sacrificed literally hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars for what I believe in.

    Mr. ARENS: While you were in Moscow, did you make a speech lauding Stalin?

    Mr. ROBESON: I do not know.

    Mr. ARENS: Did you say, in effect, that Stalin was a great man, and Stalin had done much for the Russian people, for all of the nations of the world, for all working people of the earth? Did you say something to that effect about Stalin when you were in Moscow?

    Mr. ROBESON: I cannot remember.

    Mr. ARENS: Do you have a recollection of praising Stalin?

    Mr. ROBESON: I said a lot about Soviet people, fighting for the peoples of the earth.

    Mr. ARENS: Did you praise Stalin?

    Mr. ROBESON: I do not remember.

    Mr. ARENS: Have you recently changed your mind about Stalin?

    Mr. ROBESON: Whatever has happened to Stalin, gentlemen, is a question for the Soviet Union, and I would not argue with a representative of the people who, in building America, wasted sixty to a hundred million lives of my people, black people drawn from Africa on the plantations. You are responsible, and your forebears, for sixty million to one hundred million black people dying in the slave ships and on the plantations, and don’t ask me about anybody, please.

    Mr. ARENS: I am glad you called our attention to that slave problem. While you were in Soviet Russia, did you ask them there to show you the slave labor camps?

    THE CHAIRMAN: You have been so greatly interested in slaves, I should think that you would want to see that.

    Mr. ROBESON: The slaves I see are still in a kind of semiserfdom. I am interested in the place I am, and in the country that can do something about it. As far as I know, about the slave camps, they were Fascist prisoners who had murdered millions of the Jewish people, and who would have wiped out millions of the Negro people, could they have gotten a hold of them. That is all I know about that.

    Mr. ARENS: Tell us whether or not you have changed your opinion in the recent past about Stalin.

    Mr. ROBESON: I have told you, mister, that I would not discuss anything with the people who have murdered sixty million of my people, and I will not discuss Stalin with you.

    Mr. ARENS: You would not, of course, discuss with us the slave labor camps in Soviet Russia.

    Mr. ROBESON: I will discuss Stalin when I may be among the Russian people some day, singing for them, I will discuss it there. It is their problem.

    . . . .

    Mr. ARENS: Now I would invite your attention, if you please, to the Daily Worker of June 29, 1949, with reference to a get-together with you and Ben Davis. Do you know Ben Davis?

    Mr. ROBESON: One of my dearest friends, one of the finest Americans you can imagine, born of a fine family, who went to Amherst and was a great man.

    THE CHAIRMAN: The answer is yes?

    Mr. ROBESON: Nothing could make me prouder than to know him.

    THE CHAIRMAN: That answers the question.

    Mr. ARENS: Did I understand you to laud his patriotism?

    Mr. ROBESON: I say that he is as patriotic an American as there can be, and you gentlemen belong with the Alien and Sedition Acts, and you are the nonpatriots, and you are the un-Americans, and you ought to be ashamed of yourselves.

    THE CHAIRMAN: Just a minute, the hearing is now adjourned.

    Mr. ROBESON: I should think it would be.

    THE CHAIRMAN: I have endured all of this that I can.

    Mr. ROBESON: Can I read my statement?

    THE CHAIRMAN: No, you cannot read it. The meeting is adjourned.

    Mr. ROBESON: I think it should be, and you should adjourn this forever, that is what I would say. . . .

    Source: Congress, House, Committee on Un-American Activities, Investigation of the Unauthorized Use of U.S. Passports, 84th Congress, Part 3, June 12, 1956; in Thirty Years of Treason: Excerpts from Hearings Before the House Committee on Un-American Activities, 1938–1968, Eric Bentley, ed. (New York: Viking Press, 1971), 770.

     

    VIDEO: Daley ft. Marsha Ambrosius – Alone Together > LozzaMusic.com

    DALEY featuring

    MARSHA AMBROSIUS

    "ALONE TOGETHER"

    This was one of my favourite tracks of 2011 and finally, Manchester hailing singer/songwriter Daley has decided to release it as his next single. Here is the video which is very simple with the whole thing being black and white, which works perfectly and really brings out the class in the track.

    Lyrically, vocally and visually, this really is the complete package and as I said in the Michael Kiwanuka post below, 2012 will be the year of UK soul! I also interviewed Daley yesterday so look out for that coming very soon.

    You can download this track as part of Daley’s ‘Those Who Wait’ mixtape on his website daley.tv. 

     

    VIDEO: Unsung Episode: Minnie Riperton > SoulTracks

    MINNIE RIPERTON - UNSUNG

    Minnie Riperton was an immense talent who passed before the world fully understood her one of a kind contribution to the musical world.  She has been gone for more than three decades, but her legend continues. And that legend is put in perspective in this edition of TV One's excellent "Unsung."

    See the whole episode below.