Refined and Fly

Wednesday, December 20, 2006


Peace. Today's mathematics is wisdom cipher all being born to wisdom. Today, I am focusing on my conduct, in making the best decisions in all ciphers I am in. One thing I realized was that you are always related to a cipher, being a person, place or thing, or environment. Even if you are just with yourrself, you are in the cipher of whatever space you are in. A cipher is continuous and constant. It does not stop. It is something that will always be. Even if throughout life, your cipher changes, you are always related to one. That concept is ever present and is always with you. So what is my relationship to all of my ciphers as the Black woman. What role do I play? Do I lead? Do I follow? Do I build? Do I destroy? Am I powerful? Am I learning and doing the knowledge? Am I civilized and do I civilize? Am I a strong carrier of culture and information to all those I encounter?

I know that I am many things in several ciphers and I have to always be aware of how I conduct myself, because I am always serving as an example for others (whether I want to be or not). People who you don't know exist are watching you, so I have to do and act in a way where I am comfortable with what is presented about me. This does not mean that you have to conform to other people's standards, just make sure that you are consistently living by your own, and people see and recognize that consistency through whatever wisdom they see in you. I use wisdom, cuz a lot of people don't see you everyday to be able to knowledge your culture (although you're always a representative of your culture). They may see you walking down the street, sitting at a restaurant, at the club, on a children's outing, etc. and they formulate their judgements based on the act of wisdom they see. We know our wisdom is the individual acts that compose our culture, but other folks don't know that. Act as if the whole world is watching, cuz how you would act if the world is your stage should be the same as if a couple dozen people are your stage. Those people use their wisdom to inform others about you, so people know of you who you don't know.

Today's degree in the alphabet is truth or square.

truth (trūth)
n., pl. truths (trūTHz, trūths).

Conformity to fact or actuality.
A statement proven to be or accepted as true.
Sincerity; integrity.
Fidelity to an original or standard.

Reality; actuality.
often Truth That which is considered to be the supreme reality and to have the ultimate meaning and value of existence.
fact (făkt)

Knowledge or information based on real occurrences: an account based on fact; a blur of fact and fancy.

Something demonstrated to exist or known to have existed: Genetic engineering is now a fact. That Chaucer was a real person is an undisputed fact.
A real occurrence; an event: had to prove the facts of the case.
Something believed to be true or real: a document laced with mistaken facts.
A thing that has been done, especially a crime: an accessory before the fact.
Law. The aspect of a case at law comprising events determined by evidence: The jury made a finding of fact.

So I see a fact as information, and I see truth as the reality that makes the information real and relevant based on it being shown and proven. For example, the statement, Medina was born in 1978 is a possible fact, but there is a process of research and verification to demonstrate whether the statement is true or not. When using the example of a person telling the truth, your're looking at them verifying what the facts are through their statements. When a person says, "I will be true to myself," I see that to mean a person's wisdom, (and culture if done on a consistent basis) will be in accordance with who they know themselves to be...the conduct that is most familiar or comfortable to them. That does not mean that their conduct is right and exact or righteous (although that is somewhat relative).

I see square as the standard of conduct that I as the Earth live according to and within. Although the Earth is a cipher, and a square has four sides (therefore, I am not the square), I thought of the phrase "four corners of the planet." Within a circle, when starting from the center, you can move in four directions... North, South East or West...up, down, left or right. Today, I was thinking of my four corners being Supreme Mathematics, Supreme Alphabet, Nation History and Flag, and 120 degrees. So whatever direction I travel, I will always come to an aspect of our way of life. That is what I am accountable to and that is my armor or shield of protection from negativity. So when a person tries to enter my cipher, at all corners, at all directions, this is what they see and experience, and if they come with unrighteous intent, they will not be able to penetrate these walls. By using mathematics and integrating it into my circumference, I am able to discern who should be amongst me and who should not.

20:40 q) What is the prescribed law of Islam to a said person of that ability?

a) That the civilized is held responsible for the uncivilized, and must be punished by the Nation of Islam.

So in this degree, we know that it has already been established that if you are a said person of that ability, or a person capable of civilizing others, it is your responsibility to do so, or you will be punished (i.e. 19:40). We will be punished by what the world will we be because we did not do all that we could to make it better by teaching and being a walking expression of civilization to others in every cipher that we are in. If you are not a said person of that ability, then you cannot be held accountable, however, the next step is to draw up how you can become a said person of that ability (i.e. teaching techniques, gaining more knowledge, strengthening your foundation, mentoring, etc.). If you haven't yet knowledged 120, how can you still make a positive impact on others? This is what will bring about peace or submission (acceptance) to our way of life.


I Medina Peaceful Earth

Wednesday, December 13, 2006


I guess Mel Gibson just can't get it right. After the public outcry against "Passion of the Christ" he apparently offends more folks with his latest cinematic endeavor.The following is an article critiquing Mel Gibson's new film, Apocalypto, a brutal chase action flick about a hunter gatherer, Jaguar Paw, who is hunted by bloodthirsty Mayans who make human sacrifices. Now, I just recently saw the movie and in terms of cinematic entertainment, it was very engaging and you were hanging on the edge of your seat to see what happened next. I did ask my Colombian sister Aymara what she thought about it in reference to it being offensive to the "two million Indians" and she stated that there may have been portions that were historically inaccurate so I have to further research Mayan civilization to determine the potential inaccuracies (was there widespread human sacrifice? A couple sources I briefly researched stated that there was, however, my search is definitely not complete).

In recent Mel Gibson interviews regarding the film, he makes it fairly clear that the movie is not a historical factual account, but more like an action flick set in a certain place and time. The potential danger in a film such as this and others like it is that the masses have a short collective memory, and especially when dealing with events of the past, our memories are often based on lies, media, and pop culture. Some may believe in the presentation of Mayan civilization and take it for face value, possibly perpetuating lies and falsehood, justifying the genocide of indigenous peoples. So I say, read the article, see the film, do some research on Mayan civilization, and then you be the judge.

Apocalypto: The Cinematic Logic of Genocide
by Juan Santos

Mel Gibson's Apocalypto is not a mere adventure tale,
it's not just another excruciatingly brutal portrayal
of apocalyptic violence for its own sake, and the
Village Voice is dead wrong when it says that unlike
Braveheart and The Passion of the Christ, Apocalypto
is "unburdened by nationalist or religious piety,"—
that it's "pure, amoral sensationalism."

Despite its extreme brutality Apocalypto isn't just
Gibson's latest snuff film with a religious theme. The
film is a morality play, and there are only two things
one needs to remember to get a hint of the ugly moral
intent behind Mel Gibson's depiction of the Maya.

The first is that, despite Gibson's vile portrayal of
the Maya as a macabre cult of deranged killers
straight out of Apocalypse Now!, there is no evidence
that the Mayan people ever practiced widespread human
sacrifice, and they certainly didn't target the
innocent hunter-gatherers and horticulturalists Gibson
chooses to portray as the victims of a Mayan death

Gibson knows better. He studied the terrain in depth
and had no practical limit to the funds he could
expend on research. His portrayal is a conscious lie,
one he uses to justify the premise that the Mayan city
states collapsed because they deserved to collapse,
and that they deserved to be replaced by a "superior"
culture in the genocide known as the Conquest.

"A great civilization is not conquered from without
until it has destroyed itself from within," is how
Gibson puts it. In other words the Conquest was not
genocide but a moral comeuppance; the civilization
didn't fall, in the final analysis, from climate
change or inadvertent soil depletion or even war – it
was conquered in god's wrath against the forces of
evil. And Gibson's made sure you see the ancient Maya
as a force of profound evil.

Here's a taste of the standards Gibson used in
conjuring his image of the Maya. The LA Times quotes
production designer Tom Sanders:

"We had an archeologist, Dr. Richard Hansen, onboard,"
said Sanders. "It was really fun to say, 'Is there any
proof they didn't do this?' When he said, 'There is no
proof they didn't do that,' that gives you some
license to play." And "play" they did. Rex Reed calls
the racist portrayal of the Maya Gibson's "huge cast
of spear-carriers from the Oom-Gawah-Bwana School of
Dramatic Art."

In a stunning interview with Chris Garcia of the
Austin American Statesman, Julia Guernsey, an expert
on Mayan culture at the University of Texas says of
Gibson's agenda, "'We got the Jews last time (in 'The
Passion of the Christ'), now we'll get the Maya.' And
to highlight that point there's a lot of really
offensive racial stereotyping. They're shown as these
extremely barbaric people, when in fact, the Maya were
a very sophisticated culture… I hate it. I despise it.
I think it's despicable. It's offensive to Maya
people. It's offensive to those of us who try to teach
cultural sensitivity…"

The other hint you might need to remember is this. No
matter what happens in this film, the Spanish don't
show up at the end, at the collapse of the Mayan
civilization, to "save" anything at all.

Hundreds of years would pass between the collapse of
the Mayan city states and the American Holocaust. For
the sake of empire the Spanish would sacrifice 95% of
the population in Mexico, a horror they would achieve
in a mere 100 years. Hitler's holocaust, with its 20
million dead, pales: the Conquest of the Americas by
Europe would claim 100 million lives. There is no more
savage genocide in the history of civilization.

But if you're looking for savagery, the holocaust
against the Mayan people doesn't stop there. The most
recent wave ended a mere decade ago. A quarter of a
million innocent Maya were slaughtered in Guatemala by
a death squad regime backed by the Gibson's cohorts on
the Christian Right, including Ronald Reagan and
apocalyptic fanatics like Pat Robertson and Jerry
Falwell. It's called "The Silent Holocaust" by those
who know of it.

The Maya have suffered a modern apocalypse more brutal
than anything in Gibson's sadistic imagination, more
brutal than even he would dare bring to the screen.
It's a tale he would refuse: its demons aren't
"savage" Mayans in horror movie drag, they're
Christian death squads backed by fundamentalist
leaders using old school Spanish methods. A British
anti-war organization writes:

"Working methodically across the Mayan region, the
army and its paramilitary teams, including 'civil
patrols' of forcibly conscripted local men, attacked
626 villages. Each community was rounded up, or seized
when gathered already for a celebration or a market
day. The villagers, if they didn't escape to become
hunted refugees, were then brutally murdered; others
were forced to watch, and sometimes to take part.
Buildings were vandalised and demolished, and a
'scorched earth' policy applied: the killers destroyed
crops, slaughtered livestock, fouled water supplies,
and violated sacred places and cultural symbols.

"Children were often beaten against walls, or thrown
alive into pits where the bodies of adults were later
thrown; they were also tortured and raped. Victims of
all ages often had their limbs amputated, or were
impaled and left to die slowly. Others were doused in
petrol and set alight, or disemboweled while still
alive. Yet others were shot repeatedly, or tortured
and shut up alone to die in pain. The wombs of
pregnant women were cut open. Women were routinely
raped while being tortured. Women - now widows - who
lived could scarcely survive the trauma: The presence
of sexual violence in the social memory of the
communities has become a source of collective shame."

Gibson hasn't told the story of the hunted refugees
fleeing Christian death squads a decade ago. His
ancient hunters are nothing more than figments of his
imagination, racist stereotypes of ancient Mayans who
existed nowhere but in his own delirium tremens. They
are his own demons chasing his imaginary hero / victim
/ alter ego, Jaguar Paw, through a "savage" jungle.

The framework of the story is deeply embedded in
Gibson's extreme right wing religious and political
views. He casts Mayan priests and leaders as
demonically malevolent at a time when interest is
growing world wide in Mayan politics – the Zaptistas –
and in Mayan spirituality and prophecy. The subtext of
the film and its social context involve the Mayan
prophecies of the end of an age of destruction, and
the beginning of another around 2012 C.E., an age that
can lead to harmony between humanity and the Earth.

The biblical counter-vision is of a righteous
world-destruction carried out by a vengeful god who
destroys all living creatures, a vision embedded in
the Apocalypse of Saint John, the Book of Revelations,
which was the inspiration for the film's title.

The Maya who survived the killing in Guatemala and
elsewhere kept their spiritual traditions alive -
including their prophecies of the end of this age -
despite 500 years of intensive efforts to eradicate
them. Right wing Christians see hell-driven New Age
plots at every turn, and understand attacking other
culture's spiritual traditions not as cultural
genocide but as legitimate "spiritual warfare" at a
time of approaching apocalypse.

Gibson brought Apocalypto to life on the propaganda
front of a spiritual war, a deadly serious culture war
between those who would protect and defend the Earth's
ability to live and those on the Christian Right who
want to "bring on" Armageddon.

The larger stakes are the future of life on planet
Earth in a time when the industrial civilization of
the West is seen by many as on the brink of collapse
and when the world's most respected scientists see
Earth as on the verge of ecological destruction, a
sentiment that is deeply shared by the living Mayan
wisdom keepers whose indigenous spiritual tradition
Gibson has chosen to paint as evil.

The survivors of the most recent wave of genocide
haven't seen Apocalypto yet – no Maya has, not even
those who had the bit parts Gibson reserved for them,
or who worked as extras and maids.

One can't help but wonder how Apocalypto will play to
Guatemalan audiences, but one thing is a sure bet:
Mayans will be deeply disturbed to see their culture
portrayed as a madhouse of killing, while those who
supported the death squad regime of the Christian
fascist Efraín Ríos Montt will take solace: their view
of the Maya as subhuman will be "justified" by the
film, and so will their genocidal reign of terror.

Racist stereotypes, after all, serve one function and
one function only – they serve as a story, a script
that justifies the use of violence against a targeted
group, whether the weapons of the oppressor are the
sword and cannon, the gas chamber, the M16, a lynch
mob's rope, or a camera.

One viewer understood and embraced Gibson's intent in
its entirety, saying Apocalypto:

"Pretty much precisely describes the whole point of
the civilizations of such "noble savages" as the
Mayans, if you ask us. There isn't one, there wasn't
one, and there never will be one. Those bloodthirsty
mongrels and many others before and after them were
brutal, savage, cruel and entirely without redeeming
qualities, and the best thing that ever happened to
this planet was when they were wiped out, never to be
heard of again.
In fact, we owe the Spanish Conquistadores an eternal
debt of gratitude for having wiped that
blood-curdlingly bestial, brutal blight upon humanity
off the face of the planet because, had they not done
it, we would have had to do so ourselves."
The son of a Holocaust denier, Gibson defended his
father in a 2004 interview, and, in the wake of his
recent drunken tirades against Jews, Gibson can ill
afford charges of propagating racism against Indians.
The film's PR campaign has carefully skirted potential
opposition and negative exposure. Despite that effort
Mayan activists who've seen nothing more than the
film's trailer denounced the film the day before it

Ignacio Ochoa, director of the Nahual Foundation, said
"Gibson replays, in glorious, big budget Technicolor,
an offensive and racist notion that Maya people were
brutal to one another long before the arrival of
Europeans and thus they deserved, in fact needed,

The Indians who've seen the film itself have been a
carefully chosen crew; Apocalypto, for all its epic
pretensions, premiered in an Oklahoma casino, and
certainly not for an audience of American Indian
Movement activists. The initial Latino audience was
chosen just as carefully. A Beverly Hills-based PR man
arranged screenings of the film for the Los Angeles
Latin Business Association – not for Mexican and
Central American migrants who know the Maya, not for
indigenous minded Chican@s, and certainly not for LA's
substantial community of Mayan refugees.

The Latin Business Association obligingly gave Gibson
their "Visionary" Award. But it's too late for Gibson
to hide behind such contrived honors. Even the LA
Times pointedly noted, " it's one thing to acknowledge
a work's… merits and quite another to proclaim Gibson
a 'visionary,' especially at a time when the
immigration debate has reminded Latinos that virulent
racism is only a few drinks away."

Genocide is even closer than that. Ask the Spanish.
Ask the death squads. Ask Mel, behind the camera or
behind a small glass. It's just a shot away.


Juan Santos is a Los Angeles based writer and editor.
His essays from 2006 can be found at:
http://the-fourth- world.blogspot. com/. He can be
reached at: JuanSantos@Mexica. net.

Friday, December 08, 2006


Peace! I just want to give a quick shout out to the Gods in Power Born, my brothers, who always make sure that the Earth is safe and secure. When I first came around, the level of security consciousness and concern was a bit of an adjustment, as I was used to doing my own thing, without regard to what anyone said or thought, no matter the time of evening or place. I was like, "Damn, I already have a physical father!" It took me a while to start calling when I got home, alerting my god specifically of my whereabouts, and so forth. I used to despise the concept of "checking in," and thought of it as losing some form of independence.

Then in February 2005 I got mugged walking home from work one night and realized that with all my positivity and concern, the world was not a rose garden and I had to be more prepared and conscious of my moves, cuz someone can always be watching you. This mofo followed me from the job till I was about 2 blocks away from my rest on a busy street mind you, ran up on me, and snatched my purse! Thankfully, dude didn't pull a gun out, but I was still shook, and was paranoid for a good while afterward. I knew someone was walking behind me and I looked back to let him know I saw him, but people always walked behind me. I had a thought to stop in a funeral to shake this dude, but I didn't follow through. I thought I'd be safe at the busy street.

I am now fortunate to actually work with several of the gods and I enjoy their building, laughter (the gods are FUNNY!), and appreciate their level of concern when leaving the gig, making sure that I am okay, and at times staying late with me or calling to make sure I made it to the rest safely. It is part of the black man's duty to protect the Black woman, and we have gotten so far from that as a people, that when God attempts to do so, it is foreign, and depending on your orientation to life (as I myself, did not grow up with a father in the home and didn't personally bare witness to this dynamic)you may reject it. But I have learned to embrace it, as the proper activation of culture can come in time. So PEACE to all of the Gods of Power Born, specifically the Gods I work with (I Majestic Allah, Knowledge Build Allah, Sincere Master Allah, and Aru Self Allah) for always lookin' out for your sista and having me covered on all sides!

Peace, Love and Appreciation to My Brothers!

I Medina Peaceful Earth

Thursday, December 07, 2006


PEACE! I build that everyone is positive, healthy and happy within their ciphers on this great day of God. About a week ago, I was sent an email about a disturbing article in Esquuire magazine by John Ridley called "Manifesto of the Ascendancy of the Modern American Nigger." And folks, I did check the Esquire web-site and the article is indeed there. It is in the December 2006 printed issue. This article, mind you, is written by a Black man (published in a magazine with a majority white readership), "Bill Cosby" style who is essentially tired of "niggers" fuckin' up and doesn't understand why we don't have our shit together. He then expresses his high regard for Condeleeza Rice, Colin Powell and those like them as examples of who and what the new Black America can be if "niggers" pull themselves up from their bootstraps. He further expresses his disdain for accusations of police brutality by "Blactivists" in Cincinatti, Ohio due to the nature of the youth who were killed.

A couple of thoughts I had were:

-This article exemplifies the obvious gap he sees between "niggas" and black people (see Chris Rock's HBO stand-up "Bring the Pain."). He definitely does not see himself as a part of the group he is berating.

-He totally goes against what your mama and grandma told you about airing your dirty laundry. Black folks may discuss and some may even agree with some of his points (see other "well to do" Black folks like John Ridley), however, this was not the appropriate forum. What is the fruit of this diatribe? What are the tangible (one of my favorite words)solutions he is offering to the Black community's ills?

-Did he have to vent in a magazine with a majority White readership? Did he even try Essence or Ebony? Damn...even Sister 2 Sister? Jet?

-Why would Esquire print this?

-What we are seeing amongst disenfranchised segments of the Black community is the result of over 400 years of oppression. What we see in "any hood USA" is the result of a process set in motion centuries ago that is being born out the way it is. Some folks knowingly make unwise choices and others are as Jim Jones eloquently states in the title of his latest album "P.O.M.E."s (Product Of My Environment). Some may say that in 2006, we should all be caked up, ballin' without a care in the world, due to hard work and intelligence and the aforementioned statements are excuses. We forget that a lot of folks who say things like this either have not struggled through anything nor been exposed to the conditions they are downgrading OR they did come up rough and recieved interventions that helped them through the tough times (a gym teacher, guidance counselor, after-school program, grandma, Old Man Willie on the block, etc.) Unfortunately, in 2006, everyone does not recieve these interventions.

-This article shows that some Black folks think the same way as some White folks. John Ridley and Michael Richards for that matter just vocally expressed what some folks think. And speaking of Michael Richards, he can keep his apology. He just blurted out what he really thinks. I'd rather see a wolf, than a wolf in sheeps' clothing...but I digress.

Below, is an excerpt of the article and a link to the full piece. Some people have written letters to Esquire expressing their contempt and cancelled their subscriptions. Do the knowledge and do the same if you are so inclined...

by John Ridley
Esquire Magazine
December 2006

For eleven days in 2001, two blacks ran our country. It's their example and their achievement—and not the culture of failure fomented by the leftovers of the Movement—that must set a new agenda for black Americans.

Let me tell you something about niggers, the oppressed minority within our minority. Always down. Always out. Always complaining that they can't catch a break. Notoriously poor about doing for themselves. Constantly in need of a leader but unable to follow in any direction that's navigated by hard work, self-reliance. And though they spliff and drink and procreate their way onto welfare doles and WIC lines, niggers will tell you their state of being is no fault of their own. They are not responsible for their nearly 5 percent incarceration rate and their 9.2 percent unemployment rate. Not responsible for the 11.8 percent rate at which they drop out of high school. For the 69.3 percent of births they create out of wedlock.

Now, let me tell you something about my generation of black Americans. We are the inheritors of "the Deal" forced upon the entrenched white social, political, and legal establishment when my parents' generation won the struggle for civil rights. The Deal: We (blacks) take what is rightfully ours and you (the afore-described establishment) get citizens who will invest the same energy and dedication into raising families and working hard and being all around good people as was invested in snapping the neck of Jim Crow.

In the forty years since the Deal was brokered, since the Voting Rights Act was signed, there have been successes for blacks. But there are still too many blacks in prison, too many kids aggrandizing the thug life, and way too many African-Americans doing far too little with the opportunities others earned for them.

If we as a race could win the centuries-long war against institutionalized racism, why is it that so many of us cannot secure the advantage after decades of freedom?

That which retards us is the worst of "us," those who disdain actual ascendancy gained by way of intellectual expansion and physical toil—who instead value the posture of an "urban," a "street," a "real" existence, no matter that such a culture threatens to render them extinct.

"Them" being niggers.

I have no qualm about using the word nigger. It is a word. It is in the English lexicon, and no amount of political correctness, no amputation into "the n-word"—as if by the castration of a few letters we should then be able to conceptualize its meaning without feeling its sting—will remove it from reality.

So I say this: It's time for ascended blacks to wish niggers good luck. Just as whites may be concerned with the good of all citizens but don't travel their days worrying specifically about the well-being of hill billies from Appalachia, we need to send niggers on their way. We need to start extolling the most virtuous of ourselves. It is time to celebrate the New Black Americans—those who have sealed the Deal, who aren't beholden to liberal indulgence any more than they are to the disdain of the hard Right. It is time to praise blacks who are merely undeniable in their individuality and exemplary in their levels of achievement.