Friday, October 1, 2010

Charles Barkley RIPS LeBron James Over Race Comments


 Charles Barkley RIPS LeBron James Over Race Comments

 

LeBron James says that race has played a role in the massive backlash he has received since joining the Miami Heat over the summer.

Charles Barkley disagrees. The former NBA star spoke with WIP in Philadelphia and called out LeBron for his comments on race.

Barkley repeatedly referred to the James saga as a bad movie and said the criticism he has heard have nothing to do with race.

"The only criticism I've heard about LeBron and it was my biggest criticism, that decision thing was just stupid. It was stupid," Barkley said. "The second thing when they all came out there dancing around on stage, that was silly. That's the only thing I've heard LeBron get criticized about. That has nothing to do with race."

"It's like watching a movie," the Basketball Hall of Famer added. "Just when you think it couldn't get any stupider, it gets more stupid."

The TNT analyst also ripped ESPN for reporting on the Heat training camp every day and catering to James. "They have definitely crossed the line and this is unprecedented," he said. "This is unprecedented a** kissing."
The interview was transcribed by Sports Radio Interviews. You can listen to the entire segment here.


Lupe Fiasco Anti-Evil/Greed Twitter Stream Oct. 1, 2010

Lupe Fiasco Anti-Evil/Greed Twitter Stream Oct. 1, 2010







LeBron James, race and the NBA

LeBron James, race and the NBA

A close examination of the Heat's LeBron James and the role of race

By J.A. Adande
ESPN.com


"Pardon The Interruption" and "Around The Horn" look at the impact of LeBron James' comments to CNN.


Trying to avoid writing about the Miami Heat this season will be as difficult as trying to avoid writing about race and the NBA. Here we are, mere days after the teams assembled for the first time, and already the two inescapable subjects have converged into a sports topic so consuming that we managed to go an entire 24-hour cycle without talking about the New York Jets.

Race is so incendiary that the fire quickly engulfed what should have been the real news emanating from Soledad O'Brien's CNN interview, namely the first mea culpa of any kind from LeBron James' camp regarding "The Decision."

"The execution could have been a little better," Maverick Carter said. "And I take some of the blame for that."

When I threw that quote on Twitter all it did was make some people even angrier because Carter couched his confession.

"Mav took 'some' blame? SOME?!" @dgoldstein79 tweeted to me. "He's now up for 2 awards: Worst PR decision of the century AND biggest understatement. Congrats!"

No one bothered to parse the racial comments in the same way. How many people noticed that Maverick used the same "s-word" -- some -- in addressing the racial component of the summer-long backlash against LeBron?

"It definitely played a role in some of the stuff coming out of the media, things that were written for sure," Carter said.

It's important to keep in mind that he and LeBron were merely responding to questions. What O'Brien was doing asking them in the first place is another matter. For all we know she could have been trying to gather some sound bites for her next "Black in America" special. She asked and LeBron answered, and according to the transcript, it went as follows:

O'BRIEN: "Do you think there's a role that race plays in this?"

JAMES: "I think so, at times. It's always, you know, a race factor."

That's all it took. He didn't claim to be a victim of racial persecution, he didn't call for a racial revolution. He simply responded to a question and noted that race is a factor at times.

It's a simple, fundamental truth in our society and, in particular, the NBA. As long as the NBA features predominantly black athletes playing for predominantly white owners who are selling their sport to predominantly white ticket buyers, there will be a race factor. It's an ongoing quandary, usually left unsaid.

Every once in a while the league will try to address it, never more awkwardly than the "Love It Live" ad campaign that utilized dead white singers as a means to sell tickets to see living black basketball players. Apparently the league felt Elvis Presley and Frank Sinatra made better spokespeople than Kobe Bryant and Shaquille O'Neal. And for the demographic that buys the bulk of season tickets and luxury suites, they very well could have been right.

That brings us to an essential component we must understand when it comes to any discussion of race and the NBA. It's OK for people to root for people who bear the most resemblance to themselves. I had no qualms with white Boston Celtics fans who bypassed racks of Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce jerseys to buy a Brian Scalabrine jersey. If they could identify more with him -- to the extent almost anyone can identify with a 6-foot-9 man with OrangeSicle-colored hair -- that's fine. It's no different than black people who previously didn't care about the difference between a serve and a volley rushing to the TV to cheer for Venus and Serena Williams. We all do it to some degree, be it with athletes or even "Price Is Right" contestants. We tend to support those representing our racial group.
It's not racism. I prefer the term that movie producer (and soon to be Golden State Warriors owner) Peter Guber used repeatedly in his conversation with Charles Barkley in Barkley's 2005 book "Who's Afraid of a Large Black Man?": tribalism.

Tribalism is about familiarity within the known entity. It's not about hatred of others, it's about comfort within your own, with a natural reluctance to expend the energy and time to break across the barriers and understand another group.

Most of what we're quick to label racism isn't really racism. Racism is premeditated, an organized class distinction based on believed superiority and inferiority of different races. That "ism" suffix makes racism a system, just like capitalism or socialism. Racism is used to justify exclusion and persecution based on skin color, things that rarely come into play in today's NBA.

The league routinely gets A grades in Richard Lapchick's racial report cards for diversity in its racial and gender hiring. While that doesn't mean there's complete equality in front offices and coaching sidelines, there's no sense that a powerful invisible barrier bans African-Americans from those jobs like the sonic fence keeping out the smoke monster in "Lost."

The color of LeBron's skin won't prevent him from making $14.5 million to play basketball for the Miami Heat this season. It didn't prevent him from signing endorsement deals with corporate titans Coca-Cola, McDonald's and Microsoft while in his early 20s. It didn't keep people of all races from buying his jersey. Racism has yet to come into play in LeBron's professional life. That doesn't mean he can exist in a racial vacuum.

James managed to navigate the first seven years of his career without running into any racial reefs. You could say there was an African-American style to him, but he never presented any views as coming from a uniquely African-American perspective. All debates about LeBron were on his merits as a basketball player, as an individual, never linked to his ethnicity. There was a flare-up about the similarity of his Vogue magazine cover photo to a "King Kong" poster, but James didn't join the discussion.

Lately there's been a slow-moving racial weather front moving across the radar screen on the LeBron narrative, and ultimately he couldn't escape the story.

It began with Jesse Jackson's claim that Cleveland owner Dan Gilbert's late-night rant about LeBron's departure reflected a "slave master mentality" and that "He sees LeBron as a runaway slave." It was an overly exaggerated reaction to the reaction. If Gilbert really saw LeBron as a slave, he would have tracked him down with bloodhounds and lynched him. That's what slave masters did to escaped slaves. That's why I'll never equate professional or collegiate athletics to slavery.

Orlando Sentinel columnist Shannon Owens linked LeBron's appearance on a list of 10 most disliked athletes to his race. And on ESPN.com, Vincent Thomas said the growing resentment toward LeBron from white people would increasingly lead black people to embrace him, almost reflexively.

Now James has entered the fray himself, simply by acknowledging the presence of something we're never comfortable talking about. It came to his porch and he finally opened the door.

The counterargument is that James never felt compelled to address the league's racial element when everybody was an ally. No one wondered about the racial motivations of reporters and fans when they were writing praise and buying jerseys.

That's because race doesn't affect acceptance, it affects tolerance. When people behave in a manner accepted by society at large they are easy for everyone to embrace. It's who chooses to align with the outcasts that is telling.

LeBron quickly evaporated his reservoir of goodwill with the self-serving "Decision." His own actions were responsible for the ignition and the acceleration of the vitriol. Where race comes in is the continuation. The racial element won't be measured in the condemnation, which came from all corners. It will be measured in the willingness to forgive.

Self-indulgent? I always wondered why that tag didn't stick with white athletes such as Eli Manning, John Elway, Danny Ferry and Kiki Vandeweghe, who refused to play for the teams that drafted them until they could force a trade. Did they avoid permanent ostracizing for their blatant attempt to circumvent the rules that are essential for competitive balance in the league simply because they were white? They certainly don't pop up on the list when we talk about spoiled athletes.

LeBron, like the "draft dodgers," never was accused of a major crime against society. But this week LeBron made a transgression that fewer are willing to forgive. He just forced us to discuss the existence of something none of us feels comfortable doing. He caused us to examine the bias that's always lurking, that has the potential to spring from any of us.


ESPN Senior Writer J.A. Adande
On Twitter | On ESPN.com | On TrueHoop | On e-mail
Follow ESPN's NBA coverage on Twitter | On Facebook

In a Computer Worm, a Possible Biblical Clue

In a Computer Worm, a Possible Biblical Clue

Deep inside the computer worm that some specialists suspect is aimed at slowing Iran’s race for a nuclear weapon lies what could be a fleeting reference to the Book of Esther, the Old Testament tale in which the Jews pre-empt a Persian plot to destroy them.

That use of the word “Myrtus” — which can be read as an allusion to Esther — to name a file inside the code is one of several murky clues that have emerged as computer experts try to trace the origin and purpose of the rogue Stuxnet program, which seeks out a specific kind of command module for industrial equipment.

Not surprisingly, the Israelis are not saying whether Stuxnet has any connection to the secretive cyberwar unit it has built inside Israel’s intelligence service. Nor is the Obama administration, which while talking about cyberdefenses has also rapidly ramped up a broad covert program, inherited from the Bush administration, to undermine Iran’s nuclear program. In interviews in several countries, experts in both cyberwar and nuclear enrichment technology say the Stuxnet mystery may never be solved.

There are many competing explanations for myrtus, which could simply signify myrtle, a plant important to many cultures in the region. But some security experts see the reference as a signature allusion to Esther, a clear warning in a mounting technological and psychological battle as Israel and its allies try to breach Tehran’s most heavily guarded project. Others doubt the Israelis were involved and say the word could have been inserted as deliberate misinformation, to implicate Israel.

“The Iranians are already paranoid about the fact that some of their scientists have defected and several of their secret nuclear sites have been revealed,” one former intelligence official who still works on Iran issues said recently. “Whatever the origin and purpose of Stuxnet, it ramps up the psychological pressure.”

So a calling card in the code could be part of a mind game, or sloppiness or whimsy from the coders.

The malicious code has appeared in many countries, notably China, India, Indonesia and Iran. But there are tantalizing hints that Iran’s nuclear program was the primary target. Officials in both the United States and Israel have made no secret of the fact that undermining the computer systems that control Iran’s huge enrichment plant at Natanz is a high priority. (The Iranians know it, too: They have never let international inspectors into the control room of the plant, the inspectors report, presumably to keep secret what kind of equipment they are using.)

The fact that Stuxnet appears designed to attack a certain type of Siemens industrial control computer, used widely to manage oil pipelines, electrical power grids and many kinds of nuclear plants, may be telling. Just last year officials in Dubai seized a large shipment of those controllers — known as the Simatic S-7 — after Western intelligence agencies warned that the shipment was bound for Iran and would likely be used in its nuclear program.

“What we were told by many sources,” said Olli Heinonen, who retired last month as the head of inspections at the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, “was that the Iranian nuclear program was acquiring this kind of equipment.”

Also, starting in the summer of 2009, the Iranians began having tremendous difficulty running their centrifuges, the tall, silvery machines that spin at supersonic speed to enrich uranium — and which can explode spectacularly if they become unstable. In New York last week, Iran’s president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, shrugged off suggestions that the country was having trouble keeping its enrichment plants going.

Yet something — perhaps the worm or some other form of sabotage, bad parts or a dearth of skilled technicians — is indeed slowing Iran’s advance.

The reports on Iran show a fairly steady drop in the number of centrifuges used to enrich uranium at the main Natanz plant. After reaching a peak of 4,920 machines in May 2009, the numbers declined to 3,772 centrifuges this past August, the most recent reporting period. That is a decline of 23 percent. (At the same time, production of low-enriched uranium has remained fairly constant, indicating the Iranians have learned how to make better use of fewer working machines.)

Computer experts say the first versions of the worm appeared as early as 2009 and that the sophisticated version contained an internal time stamp from January of this year.

These events add up to a mass of suspicions, not proof. Moreover, the difficulty experts have had in figuring out the origin of Stuxnet points to both the appeal and the danger of computer attacks in a new age of cyberwar.

For intelligence agencies they are an almost irresistible weapon, free of fingerprints. Israel has poured huge resources into Unit 8200, its secretive cyberwar operation, and the United States has built its capacity inside the National Security Agency and inside the military, which just opened a Cyber Command.

But the near impossibility of figuring out where they came from makes deterrence a huge problem — and explains why many have warned against the use of cyberweapons. No country, President Obama was warned even before he took office, is more vulnerable to cyberattack than the United States.

For now, it is hard to determine if the worm has infected centrifuge controllers at Natanz. While the S-7 industrial controller is used widely in Iran, and many other countries, even Siemens says it does not know where it is being used. Alexander Machowetz, a spokesman in Germany for Siemens, said the company did no business with Iran’s nuclear program. “It could be that there is equipment,” he said in a telephone interview. “But we never delivered it to Natanz.”

But Siemens industrial controllers are unregulated commodities that are sold and resold all over the world — the controllers intercepted in Dubai traveled through China, according to officials familiar with the seizure.

Ralph Langner, a German computer security consultant who was the first independent expert to assert that the malware had been “weaponized” and designed to attack the Iranian centrifuge array, argues that the Stuxnet worm could have been brought into the Iranian nuclear complex by Russian contractors.

“It would be an absolute no-brainer to leave an infected USB stick near one of these guys,” he said, “and there would be more than a 50 percent chance of having him pick it up and infect his computer.”
There are many reasons to suspect Israel’s involvement in Stuxnet. Intelligence is the single largest section of its military and the unit devoted to signal, electronic and computer network intelligence, known as Unit 8200, is the largest group within intelligence.

Yossi Melman, who covers intelligence for the newspaper Haaretz and is at work on a book about Israeli intelligence over the past decade, said in a telephone interview that he suspected that Israel was involved.

He noted that Meir Dagan, head of Mossad, had his term extended last year partly because he was said to be involved in important projects. He added that in the past year Israeli estimates of when Iran will have a nuclear weapon had been extended to 2014.

“They seem to know something, that they have more time than originally thought,” he said.

Then there is the allusion to myrtus — which may be telling, or may be a red herring.

Several of the teams of computer security researchers who have been dissecting the software found a text string that suggests that the attackers named their project Myrtus. The guava fruit is part of the Myrtus family, and one of the code modules is identified as Guava.

It was Mr. Langner who first noted that Myrtus is an allusion to the Hebrew word for Esther. The Book of Esther tells the story of a Persian plot against the Jews, who attacked their enemies pre-emptively.

“If you read the Bible you can make a guess,” said Mr. Langner, in a telephone interview from Germany on Wednesday.

Carol Newsom, an Old Testament scholar at Emory University, confirmed the linguistic connection between the plant family and the Old Testament figure, noting that Queen Esther’s original name in Hebrew was Hadassah, which is similar to the Hebrew word for myrtle. Perhaps, she said, “someone was making a learned cross-linguistic wordplay.”

But other Israeli experts said they doubted Israel’s involvement. Shai Blitzblau, the technical director and head of the computer warfare laboratory at Maglan, an Israeli company specializing in information security, said he was “convinced that Israel had nothing to do with Stuxnet.”

“We did a complete simulation of it and we sliced the code to its deepest level,” he said. “We have studied its protocols and functionality. Our two main suspects for this are high-level industrial espionage against Siemens and a kind of academic experiment.”

Mr. Blitzblau noted that the worm hit India, Indonesia and Russia before it hit Iran, though the worm has been found disproportionately in Iranian computers. He also noted that the Stuxnet worm has no code that reports back the results of the infection it creates. Presumably, a good intelligence agency would like to trace its work.


Ethan Bronner contributed reporting from Israel, and William J. Broad from New York.



US Is 'Practically Owned' by China: Analyst

US Is 'Practically Owned' by China: Analyst




The US supremacy as the top world economy will end sooner than many people believe, so gold is a better investment than the dollar despite it hitting a new record, Tom Winnifrith, CEO at financial services firm Rivington Street Holdings, told CNBC.com Monday.

Gold [XAU=X  1309.25    4.00  (+0.31%)   ] hit a new record high Monday and silver [XAG=X  21.8    0.10  (+0.46%)   ] rose to another 30-year peak as investors were worried about the dollar weakening further after the Federal Reserve hinted at more quantitative easing last week.

The US trade deficit and debt continue to grow and the authorities are reluctant to address the problem, preferring to print money, Winnifrith said.

"America is practically owned by China," he said.

He reminded of the fact that in 1900, sterling was the world's reserve currency but by 1948, that was no longer the case as the British Empire collapsed.

"America is doing what Britain did," Winnifrith said. "America spends much more than it can afford and it's not addressing the issue."

In 1832, China and India were the world's two largest economies and by 2032, they will regain that status, he predicted.

"The 200 years when Britain and the US were the top two economies were an aberration and that will change," Winnifrith said.

"The decline of empires has happened much faster than folks think. I believe that gold will be a far better bet
in 20 years than the dollar," he added.