Tuesday, June 24, 2014

Our Very Own "Nation of Islam"

Before 9/11 – 2001, that is, how many years have passed, and there is still no "closure"! – Islamists were of no concern to Americans. Well, a liberal politician or columnist might retort, maybe except for the botched World Trade Center bombing of 1993, when only six people were killed. Less than a handful. Nothing to worry about. The WTC recovered. People got on with their lives, up until, well, 9/11. As far as blaming Muslims and jihadists is concerned, anything that happened before 9/11 is just a blank page.

But wait! There's more! Brush the cobwebs from your memories. Those of us with non-porous memories will remember: Muslims have been waging a murderous war in the name of Islam, and even in the name of racism, since at least 1972! Oh, come on!

Oh, yes.

Bill Warner of the Political Islam site recently published "Jihad in America," a five-page list of sixty-four terrorism incidents dating from 1973 to April 2013. That's forty years of Islamic terrorism, and counting.

Post-9/11 data are derived from The Religion of Peace site, which, in addition to reporting the latest Islamic murders, conquests, and outrages, features a list longer than Bill Warner's of Islamic atrocities committed around the world between the end of May 2014 and June.  That's just about thirty days, or nearly 500 incidents of Islamic violence which resulted in deaths, injuries, and kidnappings.  In one month.

Astonished by the number of Islamic violence-related incidents that have not been reported in the mainstream media, or even hinted at, I printed out that list – it came to ten pages – and took the time to tally the bodies: 2,190. This body count includes Muslims attacking non-Muslims, Sunnis fighting Shi'ites in Syria, Iraq and elsewhere, the depredations of Boko Haram in Nigeria and of ISIS in Mosul.

The death count does not include individuals executed in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Yemen (did I leave any country out?) as part of the government's enforcement of Sharia, or the vengeance killings, rapes, extorted conversions, and kidnappings by the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. From Thailand to Sadr City to Damascus to Benghazi to Kenya, the Bubonic plague of Islamism has claimed thousands of lives just in recent memory – never mind in centuries past – and will continue to claim them until Islam is repudiated, or until the Western powers (or are they "powers" anymore?) decide to teach Islam a lesson.

Noteworthy in the list of Islam-related crimes committed in the U.S. is the number committed by members of the Nation of Islam (NOI), an organization which could be said to have pioneered waging its own brand of jihad on the country, and especially against whites and Jews.  And another astonishing discovery was that the Southern Poverty Law Center, not known for its  adherence to reality and objectivity in identifying domestic terrorist organizations, has actually designated NOI as a "hate group" guilty of spewing "hate speech." The SPLC staff must have been on meth then, or were recovering from hangovers from a drunken Christmas party.  

The first NOI mosque was founded by Wallace Fard Muhammad in Detroit, Michigan, probably in 1930. His origins and end are obscure and a confusing mishmash of legend and fact. Official NOI mythology claims he was Allah incarnate. The FBI, however, in possession of his fingerprints, identified him as Wallie D. Ford, an ex-convict from Portland, Oregon.  Discover the Networks notes that while WFM preached Islam, his brand of it departed from "traditional" Islamic texts and practices: (though not by much):

WFM's "theology" had little in common with traditional Islam, virtually ignoring the Five Pillars of the faith (acceptance of Allah, the Prophet Mohammed, and the Koran; the observance of Ramadan; charity to the poor; making the hajj; and daily prayer). It focused instead on an elaborate myth in which a renegade black scientist named Yakub had created the white race 6,000 years earlier as both a curse and a test for the black master race. According to WFM, the black tribe of the Shabazz, despite a 66 trillion-year head start over the upstarts, was overcome by the inferior white race and its enslaving religion, Christianity.

His brand of Islam and his preaching skills netted him some success.

By 1934, WFM's Detroit temple had 8,000 members. Among his most important converts was Elijah Poole, an alcoholic grade-school dropout who eventually would become Elijah Muhammad. WFM sent the latter to Chicago to establish a second NOI temple (after having spent three years instructing him).

Elijah Muhammad, his successor in NOI, developed Fard Muhammad's Islamic version of "black liberation theology" along the lines of racism. In 1932 he was sent to Chicago by his mentor to establish an NOI mosque there.

When WFM mysteriously disappeared in 1934, NOI, amidst charges and counter-charges of foul play, experienced its first schism. One faction, led by Abdul Muhammad, used the name Temple of Islam; Elijah Muhammad, meanwhile, established a new NOI headquarters in Chicago. Eventually, Abdul Muhammad's group would be reabsorbed by NOI.

During World War II, Elijah Muhammad became a "conscientious objector, not only to the war, but to the United States.

He encouraged blacks to become conscientious resisters in World War II and was himself arrested and incarcerated for draft-dodging in 1942. In his own defense, he argued both that he was too old for the draft, being then 45, and also that as a black man, he had no business fighting for the United States. 

He wrote: "When the call [to register for the draft] was made for all males between 18 and 44, I refused (NOT EVADED) on the grounds that, first, I was a Muslim and would not take part in war and especially not on the side with the infidels.” In fact, Elijah Muhammad encouraged blacks to support the Japanese against the U.S.  He also established NOI's paramilitary wing, the Fruit of Islam (FOI), and instituted the FOI dress code of black suits with white shirts.

Elijah Muhammad blew the mythology of Yakub to new proportions of racist lunacy:

In 1965 Elijah Muhammad published a 300-page book titled Message to the Blackman in America, based on the aforementioned WFM doctrines. In his screed, Elijah Muhammad explained that Allah had originally created the black race before all others, followed sequentially by the brown, red, and yellow races. The white race, he said, had come into existence only through the efforts of a renegade scientist named Yakub, who allegedly created white people sometime around 4000 BC.

According to Muhammad, Yakub extracted the "brown germ" from the "black germ" and in turn grafted whites from the "brown germ." The result of this ill-advised experiment, said Muhammad, was the dilution of black blood and the creation of a morally tainted strain of humanity -- "white devils" who would go on to devastate the world and oppress all other human beings, and whom God would one day destroy in a liberating Armageddon.

No reconciliation between whites and blacks was possible, preached Elijah Muhammad. Furthermore:

According to Muhammad, blacks who strive to assimilate into mainstream American culture were "disgraceful Uncle Toms" and "Stool Pigeons."

Sound familiar? Non-black Muslims who strive to integrate into American society are also traitors and probably apostates. (Though there don’t seem to be very many of them.) The Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and other Islamic organization in this country expect America to accommodate Islamic supremacist political theology and practices, as well.

NOI's current high priest is Louis Farrakhan, whose beginnings were benign and inauspicious.

Louis Farrakhan was born Louis Eugene Walcott on May 11, 1933 in Roxbury, Massachusetts. As a young man in Boston, he became a popular entertainer as a calypso singer, dancer, and violinist. While in Chicago in February 1955, he was invited by a friend to attend a Nation of Islam Saviours' Day Convention at a local mosque. Soon thereafter Farrakhan joined NOI.

Both Farrakhan and Elijah Muhammad were implicated in the murder of ex-convict and convert Malcolm X in 1965.

As recently as 1993, Farrakhan tried to justify Malcolm X's assassination when he said in a speech, "Was Malcolm your traitor or ours? And if we dealt with [Malcolm] like a nation deals with a traitor, what the hell business is it of yours? A nation has to be able to deal with traitors and cutthroats and turncoats."

Farrakhan's love affair with tyrants, dictators and Muslim-governed nations perhaps is greater than Barack Obama's.  he has also experimented with Dianetics.

According to Farrakhan, [L. Ron} Hubbard's teachings can help heal “the hurt and sickness of my people”; i.e., the pain inflicted upon them by a racist world. COS [Church of Scientology} also has the potential to “civilize” white people and prevent them from becoming “devil Christians” and “Satan Jews,” adds Farrakhan. “We are Muslims, but if Scientology will help us be better, then I want the technology of this to help us to be better Muslims,” he says.

More information on Farrakhan can be found on Wikipedia here, and on his own narcistic site here, and here.

But, what about all those Nation of Islam acts of terrorism. I cite a few crimes from Bill Warner's Political Islam site:

January 10, 1973 – Brooklyn, NY: Muslim extremists rob a sporting goods store for weapons, gunning down a police officer who responds to the alarm.

July 18, 1973 – Washington D.C. :  Nation of Islam members shoot seven members of a family to death in cold blood, including four children. A defendant in the case is later murdered in prison on orders from Elijah Muhammad.

October 19, 1973 – Oakland, CA:  Nation of Islam terrorists kidnap a couple and nearly decapitate the man, while raping and leaving the woman for dead.

October 29, 1973 – Berkeley, CA: A woman is shot repeatedly in the face by Nation of Islam terrorists.

December 24, 1973 – Oakland, CA: A man is kidnapped, tortured and decapitated by Nation of Islam terrorists.

That's for starters. Mixed in with NOI acts of terror and murder are those committed by Palestinians and other Muslim jihadists in this country alone. Retired Reverend Jeremiah "God damn America" Wright, friend of former president Bill Clinton (no surprise there) and former pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, Barack Obama's former church for twenty years, also preached a kind of "black liberation theology" not too dissimilar from NOI's.

One must wonder: Given the well-known Islamic contempt for blacks, how copasetic can "official" Islam and the Nation of Islam be? For more on that subject, see Stephen Brown's February 2013 FrontPage article, "Al-Qaeda's Anti-Black Racism."

So, dear readers, Islamic terrorism in America didn't begin with the first World Trade Center bombing. It began at least twenty years before with the Nation of Islam, the maverick Islamic political theology that also proclaims its intention to destroy America and Western civilization.

Wednesday, June 18, 2014

Skinning the Redskins

I have no interest in sports. Never had any. I don't care who wins the world soccer championship, or comes out on top during the football, hockey or baseball seasons, or which team wins the pennant or trophy. It's not that I'm anti-sports. I am consummately indifferent. I guess I was born without a "sports" organ. When work colleagues asked me if I'd watched "the game" last night, my traditional response was: "When they schedule the Pittsburgh Pirates versus the Green Bay Packers, then I'll take an interest." That friendly retort usually drove home the idea that they shouldn't invite me to join a football pool. I'm not likely, either, to go wild in the streets, trashing shops and burning cars and being maced by riot police, if the Lakers lose to the Chicago Cubs, the Oshkosh Bears, or the Winnipeg Penguins.

However, the recent decision of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to de-register the name of the Washington Redskins is a serious matter, fraught with dangers not only to trademarks and trademark owners, but to patents and patent holders, in addition to copyrights and copyright owners, as well. Theresa Vargas in her June 18th Washington Post article, "Federal Agency cancels Redskins trademark registration, says name is disparaging," reported:

The United States Patent and Trademark Office has canceled the Washington Redskins trademark registration, calling the football team’s name “disparaging to Native Americans.”

The landmark case, which appeared before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, was filed on behalf of five Native Americans. It was the second time such a case was filed….

Federal trademark law does not permit registration of trademarks that “may disparage” individuals or groups or “bring them into contempt or disrepute.” The ruling pertains to six different trademarks associated with the team, each containing the word “Redskin.”

Commercially, what the ruling means is that while the team's owners won’t be forced to change the team's name to something more saccharine (or politically correct, e.g., "The Big Hulking Guys Who Chase Obloids"), it has lost the right to control the usage of the team's name in its logos and merchandising endeavors. That is, the name is up for grabs to whoever wants to sell T-shirts, mugs, glasses and apparel under that name. The team's owners would not be able to even license the team name to other parties.

Constitutionally, the de-registering amounts to a theft of property without compensation. The suit by the five "Indians" against the Redskins might be interpreted as having adhered to the "due process" clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments:

The government may not deprive citizens of “life, liberty, or property” without due process of law. This means that the government has to follow rules and established procedures in everything it does. It cannot, for example, skip parts of trials, or deny citizens their rights as protected by the Bill of Rights and by law.

 "Due process," in this instance, meaning the legalized theft of the Redskins name. "See? We followed the rules. The Patent and Trademark Office followed the rules. That's 'due process,' isn't it?"

Another Washington Post article by Cindy Boren, "Trademark decision puts economic, political pressure on Redskins," noted:

But whether a perfect storm of those issues is gathering is far from clear. Economically, the league isn’t likely to feel much of a pinch. Most of its revenues derive from TV licensing, although merchandise sales are significant. The nation’s most popular sports league, the NFL generates revenues estimated at more than $9billion annually and the Redskins, at $1.7 billion, were rated the league’s third-most valuable team by Forbes magazine last year. Their annual revenue was estimated at $373million.

This misses the point. The potential or real loss of revenue resulting from the decision is irrelevant. The Patent and Trademark Office's decision, based on a suit filed by five individuals, constituted the theft of property, on the most specious of reasons, that the "name" (and associated symbols) was "disparaging." The Office as much as said: "Your name and symbols are offensive to a certain protected class of citizens, and hurts its feelings, so this agency is delegitimizing said name and symbols as protectable and licensable property. The exclusivity of said name and symbols is hereafter null and void."

The actual document of the decision is 177 pages long, and includes many pages of some highly dubious documentation submitted by the complainants to buttress their case, including citations of novels, movies, TV shows, symbols of Indians from the past (such as dime or tobacco store Indian statues). The five complainants, Amanda Blackhorse, Marcus Briggs-Cloud, Philip Gover, Jillian Pappan, and Courtney Tsotigh, purport to represent all American Indians (aka "Native Americans"; anyone born in the U.S. can claim to be a "Native American." The term is meaningless).

Boren's article goes on to report:

As a league official said, “The decision does not mean that the team loses its trademark protection. It loses the benefits of federal registration, but the team will continue to protect its trademarks against third parties using it.  The team has what is called ‘common law rights,’ which do not require a trademark registration.”

Gabriel Feldman, the director of the sports law program at Tulane University, agreed with that interpretation. “This ruling doesn’t eliminate the ability of the Washington Redskins to use their trademark or prevent others from using it,” Feldman told the Post’s Mark Maske. “But it does limit their ability to enforce their rights. It ultimately could change the financial analysis about whether to keep the name or change it. … At the end of the day, this likely still will be a financial decision. I don’t know that this changes the political pressure. … This is clearly not the first time there’s been a public declaration that the name is disparaging and offensive.”

A Washington Post editorial of June 18th opined:
Were the ruling to stand, bootleggers could pump out cheap jerseys, jackets and other trinkets bearing the team’s logo and name without the team collecting licensing fees. It could even make the Redskins name and logo even more pervasive than it is now.
Despite a well-orchestrated public relations pressure campaign that has been joined by the usual cadre of liberal special-interest groups, polls have consistently found that there’s never been more than a tiny minority of the public at large and, more importantly, of American Indians themselves, who think the name is offensive. Ninety percent of the American Indians told pollsters for the Annenberg Public Policy Center in 2004 that the name didn’t bother them.
George Preston Marshall, the founding owner of the club, chose “Redskins” in 1933 to honor Lone Star Dietz, the coach and an American Indian. “I admire the Redskins name,” the late Jack Kent Cooke, whose family sold the team to Dan Snyder in 1999, once said. “I think it stands for bravery, courage and a stalwart spirit, and I see no reason why we shouldn’t continue to use it.”

NBC disagrees, or hasn't read a history of the Redskins. Its May 27th, 2014 article, "Civil rights groups urge players to oppose Washington team's name," raises the usual suspects of oppression and exploitation.

Over the weekend, a couple of random Washington players tweeted approval of president/G.M. Bruce Allen’s response to Senator Harry Reid regarding a 50-Senator letter opposing the team name.  Now, more than 50 Native American and civil rights groups are urging all other players to take a stand in opposition to the name.

In a letter dated Wednesday but released to the media today, more than 75 different organizations have asked NFL players to speak out against the team’s name.  The letter comes less than a week after NFLPA president Eric Winston explained on PFT Live that the players union doesn’t plan to get in the middle of the lingering controversy.

“Despite team officials claiming the name ‘honors’ Native Americans, the ‘R-word’ does exactly the opposite,” the letter states. “It was the word screamed at Native Americans as they were dragged at gunpoint off their lands, it is the word for the object needed to collect a bounty—literally ‘red skins’—ripped from dead Native American bodies and exchanged for money as proof of kill, and it is a term that still denigrates Native Americans today. The name does not honor people of color, instead it seeks to conceal a horrible segment of American history and the countless atrocities suffered by Native Americans….”

No mention of the atrocities suffered by whites at the hands of Indians from coast to coast in the 18th and 19th centuries. Well, they don’t matter, do they?  And, of course, more of the usual suspects:

The list of organizations sending the letter includes the NAACP, the Anti-Defamation League, the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, the National Fair Housing Alliance, and many Native American groups.

How many Indians are we talking about who feel "disparaged" or "offended" by the Redskins' team name? One and a half handfuls out of tens of thousands of individuals claiming to be full-blooded, half-blooded, and even fractional Indians, according to a number of articles on the subject. For example, in September 2004, the Washington Times ran an article, "Indians give a cheer for the name 'Redskins'":

Ninety percent of American Indians say the name Washington Redskins does not offend them, according to a new national survey.

Only 9 percent of polled Indians say they find the name of Washington’s professional football team “offensive,” according to the results of the University of Pennsylvania’s National Annenberg Election Survey. The other 1 percent did not respond.

“I thought more people would have had” problems with the name, said Adam Clymer, political director of the survey, which questioned more than 65,000 Americans of all races and ethnic groups between Oct. 7, 2003, and Sept. 20, 2004.

There are bogus Indians. The most notorious of them still living are Elizabeth Warren, a Harvard professor and politician who claims to have Cherokee blood in her background. There is Ward Churchill, another obnoxious academic who called all the people who died on 9/11 in the World Trade Center "Little Eichmanns." He also claimed to be of Cherokee blood, until real Cherokees outed him. Reason Magazine ran an interesting column in 2012 on the most notable fake Indians, "5 Other Fake Indians Besides Elizabeth Warren."

My car once broke down in Gallup, New Mexico on a cross-country trip. Nearby was a Navajo Indian reservation. The mechanics who fixed my car were half-Navajo brothers who did not live on the reservation. We "bonded," because their family name was…Cline, as well. They weren’t "red" or even bronze, but rather tan, grew moustaches (full-bloods are genetically incapable of growing facial hair or hair anywhere on their bodies), and didn't have many nice things to say about the reservation Indians (drunks, lazy, always fighting, looking for a fast buck, etc.). I introduced them to the idea that perhaps being dependents of the federal government wasn’t doing them much of a favor. The indolence encouraged by the federal government was inherently destructive. They agreed.

I think the only "redskins" that might exist have a severe case of sunburn. 

And the only "redskins" who would feel "offended" by the name are at root tribalists who have a vested interest in being a "minority" ready to accept free money and taxpayer-paid benefits. The federal government is inclined to make them dependent, too.

But, then, the federal government, especially under President Barack Obama, wants to put the whole country on a reservation.

Thursday, June 12, 2014

Season Two of Fear and Loathing: A Review

I endured eleven episodes of the thirteen-episode Season Two of Orange is the New Black, which debuted June 6th. I can't watch the rest of the series. The whole series, Seasons One and Two, leave me numb. No. Indifferent.  See my first review of the series published last August, "Fear and Loathing are the New Freedoms," for a synopsis of this naturalistic, rubbish-tossing romp through the garbage bin of contemporary society and culture.

Orange is on its way to becoming a liberal cult classic, when it's simply drawn-out agitprop for the Left.

Set in a minimum security women's prison in Connecticut, it focuses on the conflicts of the female inmates as well on those of those of the security staff. There are no heroes, nor any heroines in the series. Staff and inmates alike, they are all criminals of one stripe or another. The series is purported to be based on Piper Kerman's book about her time in such a prison.

The series, both Seasons, boils over with graphic lesbian sex scenes (with a few heterosexual ones thrown in for "diversity's" sake), graphic violence among the prisoners, conniving, lying, and scheming by everyone, racial tensions between whites, blacks, and Latinos (who have now taken over the kitchen), competition among "queens" of the roost in bringing in contraband things like lipstick, cell phones, dope, and even junk food.

The word "f…k" occurs seven or eight dozen times in the dialogue, the term "c…t" perhaps half as often. Other obscene slang terms are sprinkled throughout for good measure, to make sure viewers understand that they're not watching Leave it to Beaver, or the old Perry Mason. Or even a James Cagney gangster movie. There's more "realism" in Jimmy Stewart's Call Northside 777 than in Orange.

I reached a point where I don’t really care if any of the characters resolve their external or internal conflicts. I could develop as little or no empathy for any of the characters as I could for Jeremiah Wright, Gloria Steinman, or Vladimir Putin. I felt as though I wanted to put every one of them out of their misery. Including the head of the prison, a tall, shapely brunette who is the prison's administrator and is as corrupt as the rest of the characters. Including one black inmate character, "Crazy Eyes," who is turned by a black witch, dope racketeer, and manipulator of feeble minds, called "Vee," from a harmless, mildly amusing whacko into a vicious thug and brainwashed toady who beats up a fellow black inmate on orders from Vee. Vee also sics her black girl thugs on the dethroned ruler of the kitchen, Russian"Red," whose contraband racket she wants to take over.

Black racism against especially whites is lovingly approved by Kohan in the series. Her own "white guilt" and "white privilege" in the series  is frowned upon in no uncertain terms. Vee and her thugs even pick on a helpless inmate who is undergoing chemo therapy – because she's white.

In the name of racial "diversity," the inmate cast is almost evenly divided between whites, blacks, and Latinos. There are English subtitles for dialogue between the Latinos. Most of the blacks are trash-talking, ugly, overweight, petulant, and in-your-face aggressive and mean-minded. It can't be that the writer, director, and producer of the series, Jenji Kohan, who herself resembles a cross between an alien from a low-grade science fiction movie and an apprentice clown, is waging a campaign to eradicate black stereotypes. The racism of her black and Latino characters is almost palpable.

In the name of realism, there are plenty of toilet scenes. Some scenes are so gross I won’t bother mentioning them. I'm surprised I've gotten this far in a review of this apex of cultural expression. As unsavory as watching this series has been, I still felt obligated to say something about Season Two, even in as brief a column as this one.

The most pathetic characters in the series are white males. I don't even want to "go there."

There has been much politically correct ballyhoo about Laverne Cox, the transgender inmate and house hairdresser. Time Magazine, now on its last legs as a weekly news vehicle, ran a cover story on him – yes, him, because he had his gender-defining equipment removed, but he still has male chromosomes, and a new review of Season Two. Deal with it, "Laverne." The Independent on June 6th asserted in its fawning review:

What OITNB does differently is simple; it bestows on all its characters the same depth, complexity and detailed back-story that is usually reserved for the lead. Thus, the show utilises a large, diverse cast to embrace issues of race, gender identity, sexism, income inequality, mental health and plenty else besides. Add to this the fact that it includes more interesting roles for women than all the other quality US TV dramas combined, and you have some television really worth getting excited about….

Orange is The New Black is great entertainment, but it’s also an elegant rebuke to those who grumbling resist on-screen diversity. They worry it will somehow stifle creativity, when in fact quite the opposite is true. As Cox told TIME: “There’s not just one trans story,” and the same is true of every other oft-stereotyped group on television. Here, then, is the stockpile of original, untold stories drama commissioners always claim they’re crying out for - and it was right underneath their noses all along.

Why should anyone care about the fate of these characters? No rational person would. Orange is the New Black is a clinical study of a cockroach nest, or of a colony of bagworms. That, however, is the state of the culture. But, don’t take my word for it. Here is a portion of Time Magazine's cultural and racial diversity lapdog-review review of Season Two:

Having built out dozens of colorfully named characters (Taystee, Yoga Jones, Black Cindy), the sprawling Orange is like Game of Thrones: Prison. In prison, after all, a few square feet becomes [sic] a world. One new subplot involves prisoners training cockroaches to carry cigarettes from cell to cell: in lockup, a hallway can be the vast Sahara and a bug a camel laden with riches. Like Thrones, Orange is partly a story of territory, allegiance and clans, here divided largely by race. This tension heightens with the arrival of Vee (Lorraine Toussaint), a magnetic, leonine recidivist who promises to restore the days when black women ran the prison. (The Latinas presently control the kitchen, Litchfield’s Iron Throne.)

New York magazine is so gag-ga over Orange that it has over twenty-five separate blog sites devoted to the series.

I end this review with a reader comment from Media Research on a mention of Hillary Clinton in the dialogue, in which the term "dictator" in reference to Clinton was edited out (before it was, I heard it). It appropriately captures the conscious, intended illiteracy of the series:

As people, I know that orange is old European's black color represented fascism regime in gypsy Hitler's time. Orange color represented flame that, greek fascists in Germany, root in a tribe origin from Crete Island, Greece would cover in a flame all the world. Orange color was created by 'them' mixed yellow with a red color (jealousy and a love). You can find to one picture ,who Bloomberg is handling two guns 'one red, one yellow' .You can find also orange color to NYC taxi, school bus and some cars or, motorcycles with a flame design. A gypsy's symbol is 'a duck' who has beak's orange, too. La,la,la,la....

I don’t know if it's true what the reader meant about the color's symbolism. It doesn't matter.

As I observed in the first review of Orange is the New Black last year, the prison society depicted in the series is the limit of Jenji Kohan's "vision" of what American society is and what she wishes it to be – permanently – so she can get a kick out of compressing all the wusses, deadbeats, gender-confused "persons," racists, and antagonistic tribes together and watch her notion of fireworks.

No thanks. End of review. I've had enough. Excuse me while I wash the cesspool from myself.