-
Why Doesn’t Obama Ban Iranian Press TV? by Kenneth R. Timmerman
The Case of CH2M HILL: $2 Billion in Crony Stimulation by Rusty Weiss
The Truth about George Soros by AIM Staff
Lifting the Veil on WikiLeaks by AIM Staff
The Truth about Al-Jazeera English by Cliff Kincaid
Reaganomics and Obamanomics in the Media and in Reality by Malcolm A. Kline, Don Irvine and Spencer Irvine
How State Budget Battles Could Mean More Criminals Back on the Streets by Michael Tremoglie
Radical Muslims, Environmentalists and the Green Jihad by Mark Musser
Russian-Backed Propaganda Networks Claim Obama is a CIA Agent by Cliff Kincaid
Media Conceal True Nature of Flash Mob Racial Violence by John T. Bennett
NBC’s Mitchell Should Resign Over Telling Gaddafi’s Lies (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3) by Cliff Kincaid
CASA de Maryland: The Illegals’ ACORN by James Simpson
Special Report
The Newswire
Take AIM Podcast
Barrack Obama’s pastor not only spews anti-American rhetoric from the pulpit but favors shaking down U.S. taxpayers for “reparations” for slavery. The Reverend Dr. Jeremiah Wright was the keynote speaker at the 2007 annual conference of N’COBRA, which stands for the National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America.
Wright’s talk, “A Call for Justice and Repair,” followed a statement in which he declared that “The Biblical principle of true repentance is that the offended party is given compensation to make up for that which has been stolen from them, the losses that have been inflicted upon them and their families.”
A reparations plan for blacks could extract several trillion dollars from American taxpayers’ pockets.
But Wright isn’t the only controversial member of Obama’s church. Dr. Iva Carruthers, who describes herself as an active member of the church, is an outspoken advocate of reparations for blacks and was a participant in N’COBRA’s 2004 conference.
Carruthers was identified, along with Wright, as a member of Obama’s African American Religious Leadership Committee. Wright has since been dropped from the group. But Carruthers is sometimes referred to as a spokesman for Wright and works with him closely.
Indeed, Carruthers may be even more controversial, especially on the issue of reparations. She wrote The Church and Reparations―An African American Perspective, which was reportedly “distributed by her denomination” at the 2001 U.N. World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance. The conference was considered so extreme that the U.S. delegation, led by then-Secretary of State Colin Powell, walked out.
Not only are members of his church involved in the reparations movement; Obama is said to have been politically close to former Chicago Alderman Dorothy Jean Wright Tillman, who led an effort by the Chicago City Council to demand reparations for slavery. “Chicago has become the de facto center of the slavery reparations movement,” noted a journalist for the far-left In These Times.
The Obamas’ just-released 2006 income tax return shows that they gave $22,500 to Trinity United Church of Christ, which they attended with such figures as Wright and Carruthers.
Despite going to the same church, however, Carruthers told me that she has no idea as to where Obama stands on the controversy. “I don’t have any insight at all,” she said, before saying that she had to leave for another engagement.
Carruthers is the General Secretary of the Samuel DeWitt Proctor Conference, which includes Wright on its board and describes itself as a social justice organization. The website of the group includes a statement that “Dr. Wright represents the best among us, one of the best in this tribe of prophetic preachers. He has made his church a place where one could express the centuries-old pain of being Black in America, while finding strength for a brighter day. An attack on this man of the God is an attack on all those of the cloth who believe in the social Gospel of liberation.”
Both Wright and Carruthers were involved in the Illinois Transatlantic Slave Trade Commission, established by the Illinois State Legislature in 2005. Its purpose was to examine the “past and present effects on African-Americans” of the slave trade and it issued a report in 2007. Wright was an “associate” of the commission while Carruthers was the “senior research consultant.”
Its findings included that Christopher Columbus was part of the Catholic Church’s “century of blood” in the establishment of the slave trade system, and that civil war U.S. President Abraham Lincoln, acknowledged to be “the most famous son of Illinois,” didn’t morally object to slavery but only wanted to “restore the Union to white consensus.”
In 2003, Carruthers spoke on behalf of Obama’s Trinity United Church of Christ at a “summit on reparations” opened by Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam. Another group represented at the Farrakhan summit was the Republic of New Afrika (RNA), which seeks the creation of a black nation in the U.S. in the states of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina.
In 2007, Carruthers endorsed a document urging that “Financial and human resources be identified and made available, in trust and otherwise, with appropriate church, community, and academic entities to effect institutional development and remedies from the Transatlantic slave trade system and colonialism at the local, national and global levels.” The document said that reparations should be “offered for the healing of peoples who were once enslaved.”
Like Obama, Carruthers and Wright have been deeply involved in African affairs. They traveled to the “motherland,” as they call it, where Wright was photographed in Ghana in “full ceremonial regalia” as a “development chief” and Carruthers was elevated to the position of “queen mother.” Obama’s wearing of African garb became a national controversy.
But the more important issue, from a public policy perspective, is how he would handle taxpayer dollars.
While Carruthers said she did not know where Obama stood on the issue of reparations, the Chicago Tribune reported that he was asked in 2004 about the matter and “spoke about how slavery had left a stain on the country that has yet to be eradicated.” Nevertheless, he said that he opposed “just signing checks over to African-Americans.”
During the presidential campaign, the issue came up during a Democratic presidential debate and only Dennis Kucinich said he favored reparations. Obama changed the subject, saying he favored more spending on schools.
Carruthers told AIM that reparations have to include much more than financial payments.
She may have in mind not only an apology from the federal government but some form of spiritual or psychological help for black victims of the slave trade.
In this regard, the N’COBRA conference that featured Wright also included a panel discussion of “Post-Traumatic Slavery Syndrome.” In a variation of this theme, the Philadelphia branch of N’COBRA had advertised a sold-out lecture on the subject of “Post-Traumatic Slavery Disorder (PTSD),” described as one of the Psycho-Racial Spiritual Diseases of Americanized Africans (PRSDAA). The speaker, a psychologist, said that black-on-black violence could even be attributed to undiagnosed PRSDAAs.
While Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are now engaged in a fight for the Democratic presidential nomination, it was the Clinton Administration that helped to make reparations into a national issue. President Clinton had proposed a $10 million federal research program to study the problem of racism in America. It was described by the Associated Press as “a way to measure the impact of racial bias in everyday life” and was seen as potential backing for legislation proposed by Rep. John Conyers to establish a national commission to study the matter.
Conyers, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, has endorsed Obama for president.
Conyers’ bill to create a “Commission to Study Reparation Proposals for African Americans” was first introduced in 1989. He praised N’COBRA in a statement he issued in 1999 and sponsored a subsequent event, “Capitalizing on Our Strength―Empowering the Reparations Movement,” featuring a representative of N’COBRA.
The issue became so big that the CBS Evening News, then hosted by Dan Rather, did a story about the controversy, highlighting the fact that the Chicago City Council has become the fourth major city to pass a resolution calling for reparations.
Randall Robinson, the director of the group known as Trans Africa, wrote a book, The Debt, on the subject, and hosted a conference on reparations featuring such luminaries as actor Da
nny Glover.
One of the liberals’ favorite television shows, “West Wing,” about a fictional White House, also examined the controversy in the context of a controversial nominee for assistant attorney general for civil rights who advocated financial reparations for slavery.
At the time, we noted that three veteran Democrats were advisers to the show. They were former Clinton White House press secretary Dee Dee Myers, former Carter official Patrick Caddell, and former Senate Democratic aide Lawrence O’Donnell. Time magazine reported that Conyers’ staff had sent along “200 pages of material on the issue of paying reparations to black Americans as compensation for slavery” to the producers.
Interestingly, it has now been reported by The Guardian that one of the characters in the show, a presidential candidate, was modeled by one of the Democratic writers after Obama. The character in the program wins the presidency.
If this happens in real life, we may finally find out where Obama really stands on the issue of reparations.
One thing is certain: Carruthers is hoping for an Obama win. Federal Election Commission records show that she gave his Illinois Senate campaign $500 and his presidential campaign $2300. She gave contributions to no other candidates.
Share This
About the author
Cliff Kincaid is the Director of the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism and can be contacted at cliff.kincaid@aim.org.
14 Comments for Does Obama Favor Slavery “Reparations?”
Obama would be an idiot to publicly sanctionreparations. Nonetheless, since he has spent his whole life on black issues and hanging around pro-reparations people, one can safely assume he is pro-reparations, though at this point he will never publicly admit it. At the least its my right to conclude this, and I am a white voter (and I never owned slaves).
This only points out a major point that is keeping me and many of those I know from voting for Obama. He is an eloquent speaker who speaks in generalities. The consistently heard complaints about this man is that he does not speak of SPECIFICALLY what he stands for and SPECIFICALLY what he will do. Consequently, those of us who would LOVE to vote for him don’t TRUST him and therefore, will vote for John McCain because he is a “known entity”. There are several months left for Obama to come clean about exactly what he will do as President. I, along with Jay Leno and many others who have spoken about this, believe that a candidate will say ANYTHING when he/she is running in order to get elected, to WIN, but then when they are actually in the White House and get the classified briefings on what the ramifications are of this or that action he/she takes, it’s a whole different story. That said, Obama has to speak up about his beliefs…for instance, if he flat out states that he would NOT stick the taxpayers to write checks for every black person because of slavery but that he WOULD use money to heal our educational system so that blacks would get equal footing (not better footing but EQUAL opportunity for education), I think those of us in the middle class would vote for the man. Fair is fair, but if you listen to Lewis Farrakhan and others like him spout about their ideas of reparations it scares the dickens out of us! Unless Obama does that John McCain is going to be our next President. Guaranteed.
The fact that intelligent people with access to the Internet can say they suspect Obama doesn’t stand for much or has no policies is mind-boggling.
Politicians, since you don’t seem to realize it, have something called a platform. This is a list of their positions on every issue. It also has the goals they want to achieve when they are elected. Politicians also have something called a website. It has their platform.
Did it not occur to you to go to Obama’s website and see what his positions are on the issues and what he intends to do once elected? It’s all there.
I think he may provide us a significant foreign policy advantage over the Republican Bushies. As a result of eight years of the Republication party, the U.S. is more or less a basket case. The republicans leave behind a smoldering hulk; a devastated land. I’m sure you are proud of what you Republicans have brought to the table.
It is a time for change! Out with the old and in with the new! I realize you want four more years of Bush logic and leadership if McCain is elected as president. But it ain’t gonna happen.
For more mind-numbing detail than you could possibly every want on Obama’s policy stands:
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/
For example, here’s his page on education: http://www.barackobama.com/issues/education/ which is detailed enough to educate, even you Kathleen; without even considering the pdf links to more detailed documents and action plans at the end.
Happy reading. The page on the economy will certainly help you get to sleep tonight.
Sankofa,
Juanita at our website, wrote a piece called “Google for Government”
Before you get carried away with Obama’s “policy platforms”
About REparations. No matter what your take on the issue, you’ll never know Obama’s, until, as Jeremiah Wright put it, the Chicens Come Home to Roost.
In response to Sankofa…
I read your response to Kathleen, and I took your advice and used your links to the Senator Obama sites. You are correct ther are position papers there on many key issue for the election. And yes, you are right that it makes good before bed reading.
However, I found no reference to Senator Obama’s position on reparations. Likely you will never see a firm position.
This issue is the silver bullet in this campaign. If Senator Obama brings it up he will be forced to take a position one way or the other. No matter which way he chooses he will alienate a portion of his supporters. If he supports reparations he will outrage the white community. If he rejects the reparations movement he will outrage the african american community. Either way if the issue surfaces he will lose votes.
And God/Allah forbid if Senator McCain brings the issue to the table he will be crucified as a racist for bring such an emotionally charged issue to the discussions.
In either case, for either candidate it would be like putting a gun to their own head to raise the issue.
So Sankofa… while your response to Kathleen was a generous helping of Senator Obama information… it did not answer the question of his position on reparations.
So I believe Jamal is correct that you will never know his position until he is either President or he has lost.
Whichever way the election turns, let us all remember that we are lucky to live in the Land Of The Brave And The Home Of The Free… wether our ancestors were born here, struggled to get here, or were dragged here kicking and screaming. Sure beats still being in Somalia, Zimbabwe, Ethopia, Rwanda, South Africa….
Dream about the people in these countries tonight, and awake tomorrow to praise God/Allah that you live in America.
Issues are important, but character is at least as important. What would you call someone who gives money to and takes money from the sworn enemies of this country? And who has had a long sustained friendship with these very types of people? Although guilt by association is in itself enough to get a police officer fired if caught having friendships with convicted felons, Barack Obama has shown alot more than guilt by association. He gave $27,000 to his hate filled church that openly endorsed both Farrakhan and Hamas and approved a $75,000 grant to the AAAN; an organization cofounded and directed by 2 members of the PLO; dubbed by our state dept. as a terror group. PLO member Rashid Khalidi was happy to return the favor by holding a fundraiser for Obama’s senate campaign. This is mutual support. This information has been validated by several media sources. Google “Obama Khalidi” or check out the news links below.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=gW4ZcY-VHA4
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=57231
To get a better understanding of Obama’s character, just type “Obama lies” in the youtube search box. You will hear several lies that can never be reconciled.
For those trying to deny that Barack Obama lied about the Rev. Wright, try to reconcile these 2 statements;
Barack Obama when the story first broke;
“I didn’t really think my church was controversial.”
Obama 3 days later;
“Was I sitting in the pews and heard my pastor make controversial statements? Yes.”
Trying to reconcile those 2 statements is like trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. Here is a link to hear those opposing statements for yourself. Also, listen to the pretty picture Obama tries to paint of his church shortly after the story first broke. BARACK OBAMA IS A LIAR!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=H64yKJhB528
Obama also lied about his initial stance on the Iraq War. Everybody remember “I exercised superior judgement in being the only canidate who opposed the Iraq war from the beginning.” Obama was confronted on 2 past statements he made to the contrary. He was visibly embarrased and left without a leg to stand on.
1)“There is no difference between George Bush and I on our stance on the Iraq war at this time.”
2)“I’m not sure how I would have voted on the war had I been in the senate at the time.”
Here is the interview;
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Lj-76_i7RQg
OBAMA LIED AGAIN; Just the tip of a huge iceberg, there’s a whole lot more.
Who cares if he does support reparations? I’m white and I support them.
You need to change your subtitle to read: “A reparations plan for blacks could extract several trillion dollars from WHITE American taxpayers’ pockets.” Because that’s what you really mean.
As of this second, the war in Iraq has cost the US taxpayers $532,253,755,999 and it’s only been 5 years. McCain wants to spend another 100 years in Iraq.
Reparations go directly to healing the unfinished domestic business Americans have never adequately faced. It will go directly to helping American taxpayers. It will heal our country from the inside out. It will increase the respect other nations have for this nation.
I’m african-american (and a history prof. to boot) and I don’t support reparations.
Booyah—I’m sorry you have such a bad case of white man’s burden but just stop it, please.
Slavery (black-market) is still practiced in many different places in the world. Moreover, it wasn’t abolished in many 1st world countries until the mid-20th century. Many Arab countries allowed slavery as late as 1960. Look it up.
So really, it won’t increase the respect other countries have for the U.S. It would be more like thumbing our collective nose at everyone…
Then Britain and France, etc. would be saying – “Oh great, thanks for setting that precedence America…”
Calling for reparations in the U.S. is simply another effect of the legacy of FDR. The programs he created should have been temporary. Many were necessary at the time to bolster the failing US and worldwide economy. However, the problems they have left behind have become almost too much to bear. Why should I give money to the gov’t so that they can dole it out to me once I’m 65? I’m responsible enough to save it myself. However, due to the mindset that has come to permeate our society—this idea that the government should take care of everything—most people are no longer responsible enough to save money for themselves.
Now, McCain doesn’t want to spend 100 years in Iraq, no one does. However, no matter who gets elected, the U.S. will have a military presence in Iraq for at least another 10-20 years – probably longer.
Here’s a quick lesson for everyone. To be sure, one western power or another has had a hand in Iraqi politics from the start. Iraq began as a prize for Britain cut from 3 different regions of the Ottoman Empire. They held bases there for some time after Iraqi independence. Skip ahead to the CIA helping Saddam and the baathist party’s coup of Qassim in the early 1960’s. Skip further ahead to this lovely quote, “We have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflict, like your border disagreement with Kuwait.” April Glaspie (U.S. ambassador to Iraq) to Saddam Hussein, Jul 25, 1990. http://www.au.af.mil/au/aul/bibs/pgwar/pergul3.htm
That woman was speaking for James Baker, and H.W. Bush. So…we were allies at that point up until H.W. Bush decided to invade.
Now, as for my opinion of Obama.
Obama is an elitist, and a bigot, and probably the most liberal presidential candidate the U.S. has ever seen – besides FDR. Even if he gets elected, he won’t be able to enact his programs…
which is a good thing in a number of ways.
Universal healthcare is a bad idea. I have a number of colleagues in Canada—they have to travel to Florida for their health problems due to the lower quality of care they receive with their tax dollars.
As for reparations, African Americans don’t deserve them. What I would really like is for the U.S. gov’t to enact a bill that would collect reparations and then give out those reparations—TO AFRICA. Due to slavery and colonialization, the whole continent was set back 150 years.
Reparations are just the political equivalent of a black street scammers game. Not a single slave is alive. They have all died of old age. However it seems a certainty that blacks will come out of the woodwork if Obama is elected and ask for reparations. I am not confident he has what it takes to beat this one off. He is just a boy abandoned by his father looking for approval. Not a good thing in a president.
Idea:
Pay reparations to the UK for every British soldier or mercenary who was killed in the American Revolution.
Honestly, I remember the jokes about “stupid Americans” from my days in school, but Obama… he really takes the cake.
Oh, by the way. My hometown was bombed by US aircraft during WW2… where’s my money? I demand reparations!
Reparation or no reparation, all we are saying is stop the shedding of innocent blood of children in Iraq.
Obama wants peace; Mc Cain wants war.
America should not take the whole world for a ride this time. Who says the whole world can not sanction America?
The world is watching.
With reparations, can you imagine the party that would ensue. It would be worth the price of admission.
So, according to this article, Obama has NOT explicitly favored the slave reparations movement, and there is no direct evidence indicating that he does. Too bad if this issue becomes a “flag pin,” rather than getting the intellectual consideration it deserves.
In the end, although there are legal and moral bases to justify some sort of reparations (as we currently do for Native Americans), Obama is exactly right when he says that we can’t just write blank checks. Much better to just fix our schools in the here and now, without polarizing the issue.