News: Registration requires "verification" before you are allowed to post.  Be sure to check your "spam" folder to make sure that you receive the verification link.  The e-mail should come from "Onnidan Fan Forum" with the return address ->

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - NovaSkegee

Pages: 1 ... 138 139 [140]
AFC South

Houston Texans
Reliant Stadium

Indianapolis Colts
Lucas Oil Stadium

Jacksonville Jaguars
Jacksonville Municipal Stadium

Tennessee Titans
LP Field

AFC North
Baltimore Ravens
M&T Bank Stadium

Cincinnati Bengals
Paul Brown Stadium

Cleveland Browns
Cleveland Browns Stadium

Pittsburgh Steelers
Heinz Field

NFC East

Dallas Cowboys
Dallas Cowboys Stadium

New York Giants
New Meadowlands Stadium

Philadelphia Eagles
Lincoln Financial Field

Washington Redskins
FedEx Field

NFC West
Arizona Cardinals
University of Phoenix Stadium

St. Louis Rams
Edward Jones Dome

San Francisco 49ers
Candlestick Park

Seattle Seahawks
Qwest Field


NFC South Stadiums

Tampa Bay Buccaneers
Raymond James Stadium

Carolina Panthers
Bank of America Stadium

New Orleans Saints
Louisiana Superdome

NFC North
Chicago Bears
Soldier Field

Detroit Lions
Ford Field

Green Bay Packers
Lambeau Field

Minnesota Vikings
Hubert H. Humphrey Metrodome

Thursday, May 20, 2010

Atlanta Falcons prefer new open-air stadium, downtown

By D. Orlando Ledbetter and Leon Stafford
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

ATLANTA- The era of indoor pro football in Atlanta could be coming to a close, if Falcons team officials have their way.

Rich McKay, the football team’s president, said Wednesday that the Falcons lean toward a new open-air stadium for their next home field. The team, which now plays in the Georgia Dome, also wants to stay downtown on the campus of the Georgia World Congress Center.

"Our first preference would be to be downtown," McKay said in an exclusive interview with The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. "That's something that (Falcons owner Arthur Blank) is focused on. If we can make it happen, we are going to try."

But the Falcons’ desire for autumn skies overhead could clash with the some of the Dome’s biggest moneymakers, each of which prefer to play indoors.

The Dome also is home to the Chick-fil-A Bowl and the SEC football championship, noted Frank Poe, executive director of the GWCC, which oversees operations of the state-owned Dome. The facility has also been the site of two Super Bowls and several Final Four basketball championships, and it is used for variety of other events.

To host such events and satisfy the Falcons, the GWCC would have to operate both a new stadium and the Dome, a situation that could stretch GWCC resources thin, Poe said.

"That's something that will have to be weighed into our discussions over the next few months," Poe said.

McKay's comments were the first time an official for the team, which has called the Dome home since 1992, has talked about management’s preferences for a new home.

The team and the GWCC have been looking for months at options including renovating the current Dome, or building a new dome, an open-air facility or a retractable-roof stadium.

McKay said a retractable roof is too costly, while renovating the Dome would not provide a state-of-the-art facility for the long term.

Officials with the team recently began privately briefing key city and civic leaders about its plans.

The Dome, though updated several times since its construction, is becoming one of the oldest stadiums in the league. Discussions about the team’s digs intensified over the past few months as the Georgia legislature passed a bill extending the hotel-motel tax for the Dome until 2045.

Money for a new stadium would come from the tax and a contribution by the Falcons. The amount from each is to be negotiated, as is the division of revenue from concessions, parking and other sources.

"The process is starting to pick up a little speed . . . as we move along with the (GWCC)," McKay said.

McKay said potential sites for a new stadium include property on the north side of the GWCC campus or the Dome’s current site.

GWCC officials, meanwhile, have commissioned a study, due this summer, looking at updating the Dome. A second phase will look at whether the Dome should be replaced with a new one, an open-air field or one with a retractable roof, Poe said.

If a plausible downtown site is not found, the Falcons may yet look elsewhere, McKay said.

"We have to pay attention to other sites in the event that we are unable to reach a deal with the authority that’s satisfactory to them and that's satisfactory to us," McKay said.

McKay said an open-air stadium would boost the city’s World Cup soccer bids for either 2018 or 2022.

The Falcons project that a new stadium would cost substantially less than the $1.15 billion the Dallas Cowboys spent on their new stadium or the $1.6 billion spent on the new home for the New York Giants and New York Jets.

McKay said Philadelphia's Lincoln Financial Field and Seattle’s Qwest Field, built for $512 million and $360 million, respectively, "are better benchmarks with respect to costs."

McKay said ground breaking could be as soon as late 2012 if a deal is struck from current talks.

"This will be something where we try to create a public-private partnership and that partnership requires a substantial investment," McKay said. "We understand that. We’ve seen it in other deals throughout the NFL and we intend to do that."

Atlanta-Fulton County Stadium

Henry Louis Gates Jr. says he's more white than President Obama
He's 56% white and his father is 75% white and his wife of 25 years is white

President Obama is 50% white and yet, the President has chosen to identify not as "multiracial" but simply ''black'' on the US Census form.

April 22, 2010

Africa's Role in the U.S. Slave Trade

New York Times

THANKS to an unlikely confluence of history and genetics — the fact that he is African-American and president — Barack Obama has a unique opportunity to reshape the debate over one of the most contentious issues of America’s racial legacy: reparations, the idea that the descendants of American slaves should receive compensation for their ancestors’ unpaid labor and bondage.

There are many thorny issues to resolve before we can arrive at a judicious (if symbolic) gesture to match such a sustained, heinous crime. Perhaps the most vexing is how to parcel out blame to those directly involved in the capture and sale of human beings for immense economic gain.

While we are all familiar with the role played by the United States and the European colonial powers like Britain, France, Holland, Portugal and Spain, there is very little discussion of the role Africans themselves played. And that role, it turns out, was a considerable one, especially for the slave-trading kingdoms of western and central Africa. These included the Akan of the kingdom of Asante in what is now Ghana, the Fon of Dahomey (now Benin), the Mbundu of Ndongo in modern Angola and the Kongo of today’s Congo, among several others.

For centuries, Europeans in Africa kept close to their military and trading posts on the coast. Exploration of the interior, home to the bulk of Africans sold into bondage at the height of the slave trade, came only during the colonial conquests, which is why Henry Morton Stanley’s pursuit of Dr. David Livingstone in 1871 made for such compelling press: he was going where no (white) man had gone before.

How did slaves make it to these coastal forts? The historians John Thornton and Linda Heywood of Boston University estimate that 90 percent of those shipped to the New World were enslaved by Africans and then sold to European traders. The sad truth is that without complex business partnerships between African elites and European traders and commercial agents, the slave trade to the New World would have been impossible, at least on the scale it occurred.

Advocates of reparations for the descendants of those slaves generally ignore this untidy problem of the significant role that Africans played in the trade, choosing to believe the romanticized version that our ancestors were all kidnapped unawares by evil white men, like Kunta Kinte was in “Roots.” The truth, however, is much more complex: slavery was a business, highly organized and lucrative for European buyers and African sellers alike.

The African role in the slave trade was fully understood and openly acknowledged by many African-Americans even before the Civil War. For Frederick Douglass, it was an argument against repatriation schemes for the freed slaves. “The savage chiefs of the western coasts of Africa, who for ages have been accustomed to selling their captives into bondage and pocketing the ready cash for them, will not more readily accept our moral and economical ideas than the slave traders of Maryland and Virginia,” he warned. “We are, therefore, less inclined to go to Africa to work against the slave trade than to stay here to work against it.”

To be sure, the African role in the slave trade was greatly reduced after 1807, when abolitionists, first in Britain and then, a year later, in the United States, succeeded in banning the importation of slaves. Meanwhile, slaves continued to be bought and sold within the United States, and slavery as an institution would not be abolished until 1865. But the culpability of American plantation owners neither erases nor supplants that of the African slavers. In recent years, some African leaders have become more comfortable discussing this complicated past than African-Americans tend to be.

In 1999, for instance, President Mathieu Kerekou of Benin astonished an all-black congregation in Baltimore by falling to his knees and begging African-Americans’ forgiveness for the “shameful” and “abominable” role Africans played in the trade. Other African leaders, including Jerry Rawlings of Ghana, followed Mr. Kerekou’s bold example.

Our new understanding of the scope of African involvement in the slave trade is not historical guesswork. Thanks to the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Database, directed by the historian David Eltis of Emory University, we now know the ports from which more than 450,000 of our African ancestors were shipped out to what is now the United States (the database has records of 12.5 million people shipped to all parts of the New World from 1514 to 1866). About 16 percent of United States slaves came from eastern Nigeria, while 24 percent came from the Congo and Angola.

Through the work of Professors Thornton and Heywood, we also know that the victims of the slave trade were predominantly members of as few as 50 ethnic groups. This data, along with the tracing of blacks’ ancestry through DNA tests, is giving us a fuller understanding of the identities of both the victims and the facilitators of the African slave trade.

For many African-Americans, these facts can be difficult to accept. Excuses run the gamut, from “Africans didn’t know how harsh slavery in America was” and “Slavery in Africa was, by comparison, humane” or, in a bizarre version of “The devil made me do it,” “Africans were driven to this only by the unprecedented profits offered by greedy European countries.”

But the sad truth is that the conquest and capture of Africans and their sale to Europeans was one of the main sources of foreign exchange for several African kingdoms for a very long time. Slaves were the main export of the kingdom of Kongo; the Asante Empire in Ghana exported slaves and used the profits to import gold. Queen Njinga, the brilliant 17th-century monarch of the Mbundu, waged wars of resistance against the Portuguese but also conquered polities as far as 500 miles inland and sold her captives to the Portuguese. When Njinga converted to Christianity, she sold African traditional religious leaders into slavery, claiming they had violated her new Christian precepts.

Did these Africans know how harsh slavery was in the New World? Actually, many elite Africans visited Europe in that era, and they did so on slave ships following the prevailing winds through the New World. For example, when Antonio Manuel, Kongo’s ambassador to the Vatican, went to Europe in 1604, he first stopped in Bahia, Brazil, where he arranged to free a countryman who had been wrongfully enslaved.

African monarchs also sent their children along these same slave routes to be educated in Europe. And there were thousands of former slaves who returned to settle Liberia and Sierra Leone. The Middle Passage, in other words, was sometimes a two-way street. Under these circumstances, it is difficult to claim that Africans were ignorant or innocent.

Given this remarkably messy history, the problem with reparations may not be so much whether they are a good idea or deciding who would get them; the larger question just might be from whom they would be extracted.

So how could President Obama untangle the knot? In David Remnick’s new book “The Bridge: The Life and Rise of Barack Obama,” one of the president’s former students at the University of Chicago comments on Mr. Obama’s mixed feelings about the reparations movement: “He told us what he thought about reparations. He agreed entirely with the theory of reparations. But in practice he didn’t think it was really workable.”

About the practicalities, Professor Obama may have been more right than he knew. Fortunately, in President Obama, the child of an African and an American, we finally have a leader who is uniquely positioned to bridge the great reparations divide. He is uniquely placed to publicly attribute responsibility and culpability where they truly belong, to white people and black people, on both sides of the Atlantic, complicit alike in one of the greatest evils in the history of civilization. And reaching that understanding is a vital precursor to any just and lasting agreement on the divisive issue of slavery reparations.

March 20, 2010

Health Care Protesters Hurl Verbal Epithets at Black Lawmakers
Reps. John Lewis, D-Ga., and Andre Carson, D-Ind., both members of the Congressional Black Caucus, say that a group of protesters hollered at them and called them the N-word

By Chad Pergram

Thousands health care reform opponents descended on Capitol Hill Saturday to rally against Sunday's major vote on the package.

But some of the protesters targeted a handful of black members of Congress and one gay lawmaker as they walked from the House office buildings to the Capitol to vote.

Reps. John Lewis, D-Ga, and Andre Carson, D-Ind., both members of the Congressional Black Caucus, say that a group of protesters hollered at them and called them the N-word.

"They were just shouting. Harassing," Lewis said. "People being downright mean."

Lewis was one of the most pivotal figures of the civil rights struggle. He spoke alongside Dr. Martin Luther King at the Lincoln Memorial during the "I Have a Dream" speech. And Alabama State Police fractured the congressman's skull as he led a march across the Edmund Pettus Bridge on what became known as "Bloody Sunday" in 1965.

"It's okay, I've faced this before," said Lewis of Saturday's incident. "I haven't heard anything like this in 40, 45 years. Since the march to Selma, really."

Andre Carson is one of only two Muslims in Congress and was born nine years after "Bloody Sunday." Carson conceded he wasn't used to hearing such epithets.

"The beauty is that I was walking with a good sage who had been there before," Carson said, who with Lewis at the time.

First elected in 1970, Rep. Charlie Rangel, D-N.Y., is one of the founding members of the Congressional Black Caucus.

"You don't see any black folks in these groups," said Rangel. "Ever, ever, ever, ever, ever."

Rangel suggested that some of the protesters knew Lewis' story and deliberately went after him.

"They knew what he represented," he said.

Fellow CBC member Rep. Bobby Scott, D-Va., said nothing would surprise him from some of the bands of health care protesters.

"I have never heard anyone campaign for their freedom to be uninsured. I've never heard anyone campaign against Medicare," said Scott. "That's what you're dealing with."

But African American lawmakers weren't the only targets of the protesters' invective. Rep. Joe Crowley, D-N.Y., says some of the demonstrators also castigated Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., who is gay.

"I don't even want to repeat it," said Crowley when asked what they said to Frank.

A spokeswoman for the U.S. Capitol Police said she was unaware of any law enforcement inquiry into the incidents.

General Discussion Forum / Re: Actual Unemployment In Detroit Hits 50%
« on: February 17, 2010, 11:07:34 AM »
NOVA do you always have to lecture us as if we are inept people, there are quite a number of us on here with advanced degrees and some of us who actually work in Government.

Then you should know better and I don't lecture. I give supporting facts. Now, if on the other had you can give supporting facts when making statements....please do so. I don't give lectures.

General Discussion Forum / Re: Actual Unemployment In Detroit Hits 50%
« on: February 16, 2010, 10:59:13 PM »
The Black middle class is such a dubious term that means different things in different regions.

What I hate is that Detroit is painted as some sort of Black controlled city gone wrong and its always held up as that.Yet, majority white cities with high automotive industry unemployed are painted more empathically. :shrug

The reason is those white cities are not large like Detroit. Detroit is one of the largest cities in the United States. There's no city with a majority white population that has the unemployment rate like Detroit.

City of Detroit

1900: 285,704
1910: 465,766
1920: 993,678
1930: 1,568,662
1940: 1,623,452
1950: 1,849,568  
1960: 1,670,144
1970: 1,514,063
1980: 1,203,368
1990: 1,027,974
2000: 951,270
2010: 713,777

General Discussion Forum / Re: Actual Unemployment In Detroit Hits 50%
« on: February 16, 2010, 06:17:51 PM »
Detroit at one time was home to one of the largest black middle class populations in the US that worked in blue collar jobs. Detroit at one time had the highest home ownership rate for African Americans.

I wonder how that's been impacted and how the public there feels about President Obama and the Democrats in Congress?

General Discussion Forum / Actual Unemployment In Detroit Hits 50%
« on: February 16, 2010, 02:46:52 PM »

Back in Decmember of 2009
Nearly 50%, According to the Detroit News

Huffington Post

Officially, Detroit's unemployment rate is just under 30 percent. But the city's mayor and local leaders are suggesting a far more disturbing figure -- the actual jobless rate, they say, is closer to 50 percent.

Nearly half of Detroit's workers are unemployed
Analysis shows reported jobless rate understates extent of problem

Mike Wilkinson
The Detroit News

Despite an official unemployment rate of 27 percent, the real jobs problem in Detroit may be affecting half of the working-age population, thousands of whom either can't find a job or are working fewer hours than they want.

Using a broader definition of unemployment, as much as 45 percent of the labor force has been affected by the downturn.

And that doesn't include those who gave up the job search more than a year ago, a number that could exceed 100,000 potential workers alone.

you guys need provide some proof. 

if what you claim is true why did blacks show up and were welcomed at confederate veterans reunions.

it must be hard to realize what you were taught and believed about the civil war was 100 percent wrong.

January 20, 2009

Blacks That Fought For the South: Ignorant, Scared, Or Forced?

Mario Salas

One of the biggest lies out there, and being propagandized by a group that is calls itself the Sons of Confederate Veterans, is the falsehood that Blacks fought to protect their slave owning masters. We can suppose that there were some that did, just like there were some who sold out Martin Luther King and were paid snitches against the Black Panthers and SNCC. But the overwhelming majority of African- Americans would have never been trusted with a gun given to them by a racist, slave-owning Confederate government.

The mental propaganda that Blacks were forced to endure probably produced some misguided and ignorant people that thought they could believe the lies of the southern gentlemen slave owning class.We can certainly assume that some Blacks fought for the slave owners because they were forced to do so, and their families threatened with death by the Southern murderous slave class. It would also stand to reason that free Blacks might have been tempted to fight for the Confederacy since their status as freemen would be jeopardized if they didn’t.

There were all sorts of ways to intimidate Blacks in those days including rape, hanging, beatings, and sheer terror. All of these methods were used by the brutal and murderous Confederate States to suppress slave rebellions and Black insurrections. Why would one argue about the number of Blacks that fought for the Confederacy, if any, unless one was trying to justify slavery and racism?

We can find instances of Native Americans who fought with U.S. soldiers intent on committing genocide against another Native American tribe, but that does not mean they weren’t duped. In fact, many Native Americans were promised all sorts of “forked tongued” gifts if they helped destroy other tribes. Some fell for it!

The same can be argued that there must have been some Uncle Toms that wanted to protect their slave masters, and some who were forced or given false promises. We can be sure of one thing, the Southern Heritage of racism, slavery, and murder was coupled with a campaign of sophisticated lies designed to fool people into supporting one of the most evil regimes in history—the Confederate States of America. There is no such thing as “Southern Heritage” outside of the realm of slavery, hatred, murder, and bigotry.

The South has already begun its journey toward self-inspection, with the realization that the Southern way of life was ruined and tainted by slavery. We always have to look with a weary-eye at anyone who refuses to accept the fact that “Southern Heritage” can never be divorced from the horrors of genocide and murder against its Black citizens. Anyone talking about “Southern heritage” outside of its racist history is a Klansman, a fool, or just plain ignorant.

The great majority of Blacks hated the southern heritage of slavery and racism. Some of them were smart enough to bide their time by telling their slave masters that they supported them over the Union forces, while all the while plotting for the defeat of the rebels. Some even served as spies and provided valuable information as to where the rebels were hiding and had hidden their weapons.

Many slaves escaped the racist South, deserting their forced allegiance to the Confederacy, and joined the Union armies to help with crushing blows that finally ended the institution of slavery. Many free Blacks, fearful of the laws that the southern states were enacting after John Brown’s raid, offered their services to the Confederacy by building defensive works and constructing vessels. But, they only did so in order to protect their freedom or the hope of it.

There are pictures of Blacks in Confederate unions, but this proves nothing as it was a common practice to use Blacks as propaganda to make people in the North think that Blacks loved being slaves. We cannot believe pictures from that era nor newspaper accounts claiming that Blacks supported the South for the simple reason that the slave owners owned the newspapers, and had the ability to force Blacks to say whatever they wanted under penalty of death.

Some pictures appear to be forged as they were of Black Mexicans. These were not slaves at all. Blacks were forced into service and made to do the work of the Confederate States of America. This is something that should never be celebrated and is a disgrace to raise it to the level of a civilized society.

Any people that are forced to take up arms in defense of their slavers or oppressors can never be equated with justice or heroism. We must realize that the Confederate States of America was an ugly blot upon history and should never be celebrated. That organization should be looked at in much the same way we view the despicable Nazi regime of Adolph Hitler. Everyone should be careful when surfing the web for there are dozens of racist Web sites that repeat the lies that the slave owners invented hundreds of years ago.

I really believe you already know the answer to this one Y.

I think everyone already knows the answer. Enslaved Africans were forced into doing certain things directly and indirectly.


Politics / Alabama Sets Voter Registration Record
« on: October 29, 2008, 08:34:42 PM »
Monday, October 27, 2008

Alabama Sets Voter Registration Record
Associated Press

MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) -- Alabama has set a voter registration record and the numbers are still growing.

Friday was the deadline to register to vote in Alabama. As of Monday morning, Alabama's voter rolls were about 7,600 names away from hitting 3 million. Election officials are still processing the rush of last-minute applications and a final number won't be available until later in the week.

The state's supervisor of voter registration, Ed Packard, said Alabama may cross the 3 million mark when all forms are processed.

Alabama's old record was 2.88 million registered voters during the 2000


General Discussion Forum / Re: Why many blacks vote Democrat
« on: January 25, 2008, 05:54:00 PM »
I think African Americans should be in both parties.

Pages: 1 ... 138 139 [140]

Powered by EzPortal