Tuesday, March 4, 2008

Fucking liar

“[T]he fact is that people are going to give a light-skinned girl more opportunities than dark-skinned boys. People fear black boys. By the time my brothers were in high school they were six feet tall. I’m five foot nothing and weigh 100 pounds. ... I honestly believe that’s what made the difference.”

Those are the words of Margaret B. Jones, a 33-year-old woman – half white, half Native American – raised by a black foster mom in South Central Los Angeles. Her book, “Love and Consequences: A Memoir of Hope and Survival,” just came out.

It’s the story of how young Margaret used to run with the Bloods – along with her foster brothers – and sell drugs... until she turned her life around and left the gang-banging behind.

Guess what?

Fucking lies. All of it.

Her real name is Margaret “Peggy” Seltzer. She’s white. Just plain ol’ white. And she grew up comfortable in white-ass Sherman Oaks with her natural family.

Matter fact, her own sister snitched her out after she saw Margaret’s picture in the New York Times last week.

Oh, the New York Times raved about this book and its “colorful, streetwise” slang. (Margaret didn’t use the letter ‘C’ in dialogue; she always replaced it with a ‘K’ because Bloods hate the letter ‘C.’ Because it represents Crips.)

“She captures... the brutal realities of a place where children learn to sleep on the floor to avoid the random bullets that might come smashing through the windows and walls at night,” wrote Times book critic Michiko Kakutani.

Kakutani wasn’t the only sucker. Alice Walker’s daughter – writer Rebecca Walker – called “Love and Consequences” “a must-read for anyone looking to deepen their understanding of contemporary American culture. ... Margaret Jones uses her own life to tear down the walls between South Central and the world beyond.”

Here’s a taste of Chapter One (as excerpted by the New York Times last week), in which Margaret describes seeing an “OG” get gunned down on the street when she was 12:

“[T]he more I thought about it, the more I just hated the Crips. I thought about the homies speeding off after the Crip car. ... I vowed to be like those Bloods, to get even. We were on our own in the City of Angels, and we were smoking [epithet], sending them to heaven every day just to keep the name.”

(That unfit-to-print “epithet” must be niggas. I’d bet any amount of money.)

Fuck me, this shit makes me sick.

Wanna know what’s worse? In a confessional phone interview yesterday with a New York Times reporter, this lying bitch had the nerve to say that she did it to help black people... like the ones she met while working in a gang-prevention program. Margaret Seltzer says black folks wanted her to write this book!

“I was in a position where at one point people said you should speak for us because nobody else is going to let us in to talk,” she said. “Maybe it’s an ego thing – I don’t know. I just felt that there was good that I could do and there was no other way that someone would listen to it.”

Sick lying bitch.

The Penguin Group, which published “Love and Consequences,” has recalled all copies of the book.

That’s not enough.

For starters, Seltzer’s ignorant, tone-deaf editor – Sarah McGrath – owes an apology to the black community of South Los Angeles.

(Ms. McGrath also ought to make amends to Rebecca Walker – whom she has edited – for getting Walker to endorse these lies.)

McGrath’s bosses at the Penguin Group should make some gesture of contrition and good will also. They were probably already counting the money they expected to make... peddling black pain and death to white readers.

Before the hustle went wrong, Margaret Seltzer said her agent had also sold the book to a Danish publisher. “I keep thinking to myself why would someone in Denmark want to read what I have to say?,” Margaret said (in an interview recently pulled from Penguin’s website, but archived here).

Why would somebody in Denmark want to read about black ghetto pathology? Come on, homegirl... you know the answer to that one.

If you didn’t, you wouldn’t have gone to the trouble of cooking up just the right batch of bullshit.

(The title was originally announced as “Blood and Consequences: Coming of Age in an L.A. Gang.” But the pimp-daddies at Penguin no doubt figured that having “Love,” “Hope” and “Survival” in the title would better suit it to Oprah’s Book Club.)

93 comments:

neptune said...

Every young white actress under 25 in Hollywood is probably cursing her name right about now, as former visions of Oscar speeches now dance out of their heads. You'd think the publisher would have done a better job of vetting both the book and its author, especially after that millions little pieces fiasco.

cuz said...

I'm still trying to figure out why The New York Times is still considered credible most especially on the dialogue about race.

Jorge Vega said...

Wait... NPR was just doing an interview with her last week. Did this news just come out or did they get duped too?

Undercover Black Man said...

^ Jorge: News broke late last night on the NYTimes website.

Undercover Black Man said...

Every young white actress under 25 in Hollywood is probably cursing her name right about now...

Neptune, Ellen Page coulda rocked it.

Malcolm said...

Yes, but can you blame her?

Wouldn't everyone be envious of the many advantages of growing up black in America? ;)

Bret LaGree said...

If it hasn't already been used, I nominate creating an entry for "Making Shit Up And Publishing It As a Memoir" at Stuff White People Like.

Jorge Vega said...

Here's the audio from her interview on the local NPR station in Boston.

Listen to the idealized "Big Momma"... damn.

Michael Fisher said...

Margaret B. "Jones".

LOL.

Now aside from having perpetrated this mis-identity, how is Ms. Seltzer different from ya boy Dave Simon?

Bklyn6 said...

Margaret “Peggy” Seltzer. Talk about MWP of the week!

"raised by a black foster mom in South Central Los Angeles."

Well, that had me lookin' all askance.

onefinemess said...

Ho-leee fuck.
What kind of stupid are we growing on trees these days? Do they not realize that the internet will find your shit out in less time than it took you to come up with your bullshit idea?

That dude just got his ass busted for bold faced lying to Oprah like what, 2 years ago?


Now, I'm sure lying in memoirs was big 50 years ago - but it won't fly now.

You know what, I'm going to give up on my dream up being a sci-fi author and just move on over into the "making shit up" genre that seems to be booming these days. Much easier.

Lolo said...

Let's see, the publishing world doesn't read much, does it? James Frey, JT Leroy, that one woman who just got busted for her "holocaust memoirs" published ten years ago .., oh wait, wasn't there another recent one too? No wait, that was plagiarism. So many liars to keep track of!

Why not just call it a roman à clef and cover your butt?

Matt Norwood said...

You've come a long way since 1953, baby.

Dan Coyle said...

What amuses me most of all? That anyone actually believed Seltzer was half-Indian. I mean, whiskey tango foxtrot, just LOOK AT HER!

I think McGrath should have her ass fired for being so easily fooled. From what I can gather, Seltzer's "research" seems to be mostly playing Grand Theft Auto San Andreas a lot.

Finally, he sister said, "it's got to stop" when referring to it. That implies Seltzer has a history of being a lying liar.

Mes Deux Cents said...

Hi UBM,

The publisher/ editor had to be in cahoots with her. Otherwise this could not have made it into print.

The first thing any editor should have done was ask to meet her foster mother and foster siblings.

And does she get to keep the money she's earned?

Kellybelle said...

Un-effing-believable. Why would anyone even go through the trouble to do something like this? Just write a work of fiction.

dez said...

^That's what I was thinking, kellybelle. Or if she really worked in a gang-prevention program, she could have interviewed real gangstas and wrote about their lives. She didn't have to insert herself into the narrative. What a twit.

Anonymous said...

I had hoped Undercover Black Man would be all over this and am not disappointed. This stuff is like Herbert Kornfeld's gangster accountant--absolutely shocking. (So this is "How Race Is Lived In America.")

When every white frat boy is calling himself an "O.G.," how is it that the editor could spend three years on this and never notice how vapid and insulting it was?

John B. said...

I read Michiko Kakutani's review in the New York Times and I thought "this doesn't pass the smell test." A white gang member in South Central? Yeah, right. The thing that I find absolutely amazing is that Kakutani is the hardest, meanest book reviewer on the face of this earth. There are very few books she likes, but she fell for this one.

When I read the "Human interest" story in the Times a few days ago I was even more increduilous. Another dip-shit white girl embracing "ghetto chic." Gimme a goddamn break!

Anonymous said...

P.S. You're right about the N-word. It's in the USA Today version of the excerpt.

12kyle said...

WOW!! I would normally say that I'm surprised...but i'm not. Just a stupid lil white girl with a vivid imagination. I agree with Mes Deux Cents.

Lolo said...

The problem with getting such a story published as pure fiction is that she's seemingly as whitebread as she can be. So, you then have to weigh the valid question of writing/exploiting that which you do not directly experience.

I know, that's why it's called fiction but she certainly would have been called out for some of her more "colourful" diaglogue, yes?

Let's see. It's perhaps akin to a man writing about suffering from being gang raped and the ensuing devastation, from a ficitional female narrative.

It does boil down to lazy writing, IMO and lazy editing and fact checking by the publishing house.

If it could have been well written fiction then it would be just another novel written from a researched albeit fictional point of view, ala Memoirs of a Geisha (which I hate but that's a whole 'nother rant).

memomachine said...

Hmmmmm.

The problem overall isn't that she's white or that she's pretending to be black and impoverished, which I agree is pretty damn insulting, but that liberals eat this shit up.

Look at Rigoberta Menchu's autobiography. She won the **Nobel prize for literature** and the Pulitzer. And was then proven to be a fraud. Instead of a poor oppressed native indian living in a hut she was actually fairly prosperous middle-class.

And yet even after being exposed her book is still used as a textbook because liberals think the narrative, as fake as it is, is how things should be.

Why do these books get published with nobody checking? Because liberals are in charge. Liberals love a narrative that fits their world-view. And in that world-view blacks are poor uneducated savages that shoot each other and need the gentle guidance of white liberals in government.

*shrug*

Rottin' in Denmark said...

Yes, memo, only liberals evince the exceedingly human trait of wanting the world to conform to their worldview. I know I'm supposed to fulfill my internet-commenterly duties and say something like 'conservatives do that too! Look at [isolated example from past three years]! See?!'

But really, everyone does that. It sucks, and they should be called out on it whenever it happens, regardless of their elephant-or-donkey affiliation.

I read an interview with David Simon in 'Time' the other day, where he talked about how fabrication is a genuine problem with journalism (and, by extention, memoirs) today. I remember rolling my eyes a bit, going, 'ok, but there are surely bigger problems, right?' After this week, I'm not so sure. I think the two Freyettes who got caught this week really only got busted because of the hurricane of attention their books received. How many middle-list memoirs are full of shit but never get enough attention to get noticed? And how much does this go on, in a million tiny ways, at newspapers?

I used to be a reporter, and I have to admit, I was extremely tempted to boost a quote here and there, or add a little detail to make the story gel a bit more. I never did it out of respect for my (hardass) editors and the knowledge that I would feel like shit afterwards, but damn it's tempting.

OK, so I'm off on a bit of a rant here. What's most offensive to me about this young lady is the sheer *laziness* of what she did. Want to tell the story of the black inner city kids you work with? Interview them. Spend time with them. Then write a book about *them*, not you. But her excuse really isn't even worth engaging with, is it? She sucks, and should be forever banished to working in PR.

Undercover Black Man said...

Well, a few hours' sleep didn't help. I still feel like throwing a garbage can through a plate glass window.

dj said...

On the other Blog I haunt daily,"Stereo Describes My Scenario",Avery who is a teacher,once asked for recommendations on a book for his class that would inspire discussion.

I suggested a book that I had truly enjoyed and thought was suitable.

"The Education Of Little Tree" by
Forest Carter.

A touching semi auto-biographical story written by a Man who was part Cherokee,authentic writing that just drew you in and touched your heart.

Ave' also wanted some material that he could use for questions and discussion with his class,so I hoped on-line only to discover quite a bit of info concerning this book and "Forest"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Education_of_Little_Tree

I still think it would be a good book for a class discussion,but in a whole new direction, than what I thought all those years had been a special book.

Now,instead of a inspiring "true" story,it has a big FICTION stamp in my mind and raises subjects of Deceit,If personal redemption is possible or if our past defines the rest of our lives.
I don't know what his intentions were when he wrote this book and assumed his new identity.
To hide from his past,to profit, or in his mind to make a positive contribution?

I haven't been able to re-read the book since,but have to wonder if the story would be still as innocent and sweet,or if there are hidden messages that indeed made it just another instrument of the evil he was part of.

Undercover Black Man said...

Sarah McGrath is the villain.

Sarah McGrath is the villain.

She is a magna cum laude graduate of Harvard. Her dad Charles McGrath is a big deal at the New York Times. (Former Book Review editor, in fact.) She spent three years working with Peggy Seltzer on this book.

And never a doubt? Never a red flag?

That can only happen if you know absolutely nothing about black people. Just judging by that Chapter One which was excerpted in the Times... there is no detail in it that sounds fresh to me. Sounds like it all could've been gleaned from hood movies or other non-fiction books.

You know you're reading something true when you're surprised by the unusual detail.

DeAngelo Starnes said...

I gotta stop these lunchtime drive-bys to the site because I don't time to let loose, but good catch, Dave.

A real life Scott Templeton. Too bad she didn't have a Gus Haynes scratching an itch.

elle said...

yeah,memo,because conservatives never tell lies like to say,invade two nations,fuck them up, and continue to believe them despite no evidence.f

memomachine said...

Hmmmm.

@ Rottin' in Denmark

"Yes, memo, only liberals evince the exceedingly human trait of wanting the world to conform to their worldview."

Actually the definition of a conservative includes the requirement of seeing the world as it is, rather than as they wish it to be.

"I read an interview with David Simon in 'Time' the other day, where he talked about how fabrication is a genuine problem with journalism (and, by extention, memoirs) today."

Bad news there. Most journalists are rabid progressive liberals.

See a pattern?

memomachine said...

Hmmmmm.

@ elle

"yeah,memo,because conservatives never tell lies like to say,invade two nations,fuck them up, and continue to believe them despite no evidence.f"

Actually no conservative told any lies about Iraq or Afghanistan. These invasions happened largely because of information provided by the CIA.

The same precise CIA that had been under Clinton. Including the *Director*.

And, amusingly enough, the same precise arguments for attacking Iraq were made by President Clinton and his administration.

So if there were any "lies" then they were also put forth by not only President Clinton but also his administration. Many of whom, like the Director of the CIA, were taken on as-is by President Bush.

...

I love talking to liberals. You guys really amuse the hell out of me.

Ashley said...

memomachine: stfu. It's about lying, and nothing else. STFU.

When reading the excerpt, I thought that this sounded like a undergraduate writing exercise where some privileged freshman tries to ape a Donald Goines story.

tAnYeTTa said...

I love the title of this post!

Invisible Woman said...

Fuc*ing WOW.

People are SO freaking ready to believe a stereotype.

And to give it accolades? I hate this sh*t too, UBM. With every fiber.

Undercover Black Man said...

I love the title of this post!

Thanks, Tanyetta. Yeah... I'm witty.

Invisible Woman said...

@dan coyle---I thought the same thing; nothing is diluting the that blood...you can see it at a glance.

Undercover Black Man said...

People are SO freaking ready to believe a stereotype.

That's the thing, IW. Reminds me of the Janet Cooke fiasco almost 30 years ago... "An 8-year-old heroin addict? Wow, those ghetto blacks sure live like animals, don't they?"

It's like you can make up almost any foul garbage, and have it be believed by these Ivy-League-educated publishing executives and newspaper editors.

Janet Cooke... You ever wonder what happened to that lying bitch? Wikipedia says she got almost $1 million selling her life story to a Hollywood studio.

I bet Peggy Seltzer is likewise wondering if these lemons could become lemonade. Maybe she could have a movie made about her treachery, like Stephen Glass.

Ah, Stephen Glass. There was a lying bitch.

dj said...

The first Times article is almost as bad as the book,for both "Peggy" and the reporter that covered it.
I can no longer get through to it without subscribing,but the amount of detail used to describe which discount store the cover for the couch and the end table came from,her Ghetto tat and the"Big Mom's" recipe Black Eyed peas and Pork bubbling in the Kitchen.
She went out of her way to make things look "authentic" for the reporter and piled on more BS which the reporter ate up and added their own florishes too.

Anonymous said...

Big Mom's memoir just went to galleys. It's called "Chillin' wit Chilluns: raisin' up li'l OGs in da hood".

Dan Coyle said...

Cooke got 1 million? Last I heard she was working in a department store. Man, that's depressing.

elle said...

I ain't a liberal memomachine. I'm conservative on some issues, like illegal immigration, and progressive on others,like poverty,but don't every try to label me. Furthermore, while it is true that Clinton dispised Iraq,after all, he did put a trade embargo against them that resulted in millions of Iraqi children dieing,(I ain't a fan of Clinton) he never EXPLOITED A TRAGEDY TO INVADE TWO NATIONS,GET 100,000 SOLDIERS KILLED, 1 MILLION CIVILIANS KILLED, AND 10 MILLION PEOPLE DISPLACED. Talking about something and doing something are two different things,memo, I know its hard for you neocons to tell the difference. Actions speak louder than words.
Further more, I thought most people knew by know that,while it is true the CIA created the rationale, where they got it from is questionable, possible even fabricated. I mean, only the hard right believe that crap about Hussein being in league with bin Laden(even though Hussein is a atheist that hated jihadist)or him having wmds, of course you do,memo. Neocons are straight fucking pathetic.
While economic conservatives don't inforce their world view, social conservatives sure as hell do.

Tarrou said...

UBM, what do you make of reactions like the ones over at Bitch, PhD (Tuesday and Monday posts both). I'm having a hard time articulating why this kind of episode is so aggravating in the face of that kind of bemused curiosity.

Anonymous said...

Oh man this is rich stuff from the interview http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/garden/28jones.html?pagewanted=2&sq=margaret%20jones&st=nyt&scp=4

With its shootings, pimps beating prostitutes in the street and drug deals plainly transacted in front of children, the Los Angeles neighborhood where Ms. Jones lived is light years from her tame life now.

Ms. Jones gave birth to her daughter while she was still in college, then graduated with a degree in ethnic studies, She stayed on in Eugene. Rya’s father, she said, was “the first white guy I ever dated, and she was the first white baby I ever saw. I said, she looks sickly, is there something wrong with her?”

Anonymous said...

More from the interview:

Sometimes it’s so quiet in Eugene that she feels panicky. The other day she heard an airplane and thought of the police helicopters that were always overhead in Los Angeles. “We used to say they were chopping up the air so we could breathe,” she said.

A film agent has shown interest in her book, she said. What if the film rights were sold and she were to see some bigger money?

“I’d probably buy a building in the ’hood in L.A. and open a community center and some boxing rings,” she said. “There’s nothing for kids to do. I don’t really need that iPod that shows movies.”

And a website for the foundation: http://brothersisterhood.com/

So noble!

memomachine said...

Hmmmmm.

@ Ashley

"memomachine: stfu. It's about lying, and nothing else. STFU."

I disagree. It's not about lying at all.

It's really about liberals who view blacks in a very specific way and who are so convinced of this that anything that supports that specific worldview gets accepted immediately and without question.

Let's face it. You're not outraged because someone lied. You're outraged because a bunch of jackasses in publishing and the book review media swallowed that bullshit without even blinking.

Undercover Black Man said...

^ I'm outraged about both.

Vince Spence said...

Even I am not dumb enough to think I could pull something this off.

Anonymous said...

I laughed and laughed and laughed when I heard about this, I just knew it would upset people. Hooray for Margaret!

memomachine said...

Hmmmmm.

@ elle

"I ain't a liberal memomachine."

That's a surprise. Seriously.

"I'm conservative on some issues, like illegal immigration, and progressive on others,like poverty,but don't every try to label me."

Being against illegal immigration doesn't mean you're conservative. Being against illegal immigration isn't even a conservative position since it crosses all political demarcations.

"Furthermore, while it is true that Clinton dispised Iraq,after all, he did put a trade embargo against them that resulted in millions of Iraqi children dieing,(I ain't a fan of Clinton) he never EXPLOITED A TRAGEDY TO INVADE TWO NATIONS,GET 100,000 SOLDIERS KILLED, 1 MILLION CIVILIANS KILLED, AND 10 MILLION PEOPLE DISPLACED."

A. Clinton, and members of his administration, stated precisely the same arguments as Bush and his administration did on Saddam and Iraq. The data used to justify the invasion of Iraq largely came from CIA operations during the Clinton Presidency.

B. Children in Iraq died because Saddam didn't give a flying fuck about them.

C. Remember Oil for fucking food program? Remember? The United Nations program administered by the United Nations for the express purpose of allowing sufficient trade to support the civilian population of Iraq?

Who stole the money from it? Saddam and the UN.

D. Nobody exploited a "tragedy" to invade. We invaded because we had to and because the alternative was the status quo.

Frankly this nonsense you're spouting alone proves you're far from a conservative.

E. 100,000 soldiers weren't and haven't been "killed".

F. 1,000,000 civilians haven't been "killed". Now you're showing your true liberal roots in spouting this bullshit.

G. Most of the 10 million or so Iraqis displaced are closely linked to terror groups who had to displace themselves to avoid being killed due to the terrorist activities of their family members.

"Talking about something and doing something are two different things,memo, I know its hard for you neocons to tell the difference."

Do you even know what a "neocon" is? You don't even have a clue do you?

I assure you. I'm not a "neocon".

"Actions speak louder than words."

I know. And like Bob Geldorf said about Africa and Bill Clinton: "he did fuck all".

"Further more, I thought most people knew by know that,while it is true the CIA created the rationale, where they got it from is questionable, possible even fabricated."

Like I pointed out. The CIA is a bastion of liberal Democrats and was run, at the time of the invasions, by a **Bill Clinton appointee**.

"I mean, only the hard right believe that crap about Hussein being in league with bin Laden(even though Hussein is a atheist that hated jihadist)or him having wmds, of course you do,memo."

Hussein was an atheist?

ROFLMAO!!

He only spent billions of stolen money building lavish mosques.

He owned a Koran WRITTEN USING HIS OWN BLOOD FOR THE INK!!!

Article about Saddam's Koran


Seriously. Where do you get this shit? Atheist?

Seriously laughing my ass off.

"Neocons are straight fucking pathetic."

I'm sure you think you're jacking me but really, you're seriously off base.

But that's because you don't know what a "neocon" is.

"While economic conservatives don't inforce their world view, social conservatives sure as hell do."

Amusingly enough I'm a fiscal conservative.

Anonymous said...

I think a 'real' homie from da hood should write a book about being raised by a rich white millionaire middle aged man. Oh wait, I forgot about Different Strokes.

memomachine said...

Hmmmmm.

@ UBM

"^ I'm outraged about both."

And you're goddamn right be so.

BTW for anyone who cares:

A "neocon" is a social liberal with very aggressive conservative views on foreign policy and national defense.

Which is why most conservatives are very iffy about neocons since the majority of conservatives concentrate on domestic fiscal and social issues and are usually isolationists at heart.

Which is a nice way of saying most conservatives would really like to tell the rest of the world to go fuck itself.

And especially the United Nations.

Cal said...

As stated in many posts, where was the vetting for this fable? Just like James Frey's work of biographical fiction, how can this still happen in this era?

Will she pay the ultimate price like Janet Cooke, or still be able to publish like Frey?

DeAngelo Starnes said...

These fucking labels of "conservative," "neocon,"
"moderate," "neoliberal," and "liberal" are complete and utter nonsense. More shortcut labelling that do nothing more than prejudice someone from the words uttered from the labelled person's mouth. Which leads to more namecalling. Just say how you feel about an issue and let your thoughts determine agreement or disagreement. Gee whiz.

susie said...

Karma's a boomerang.

I'm waiting for the cosmically ironic headline, "Sarah McGrath shot in driveby crossfire."

Ellen Page could still rock it - I think the writing of the lies would make good comedy. It would open in that Starbucks on Ventura where the celebrities sip their nonfat decaf lattes and this little imagineer plugs in her laptop. I'd do it like the Princess Bride where you enter the fantasy world of the story that's being told.

But seriously - heads should roll at Penguin.

dj said...

"Gee whiz"???

I think Deangelo just blew his cover.
He's really the Beav.
Did anyone do a background check on this guy?

What's next,"Oh Sugar!" or "Sassafrass!"?

Ashley said...

@susie: that's hysterical.

I'd laugh my ass off if this bitch got caught in the cross-fire of a drive by.

Apropos, n'est-ce pas?

elle said...

True, Saddam Husein wasn't a atheist, what I meant was a agnostic,not actively practicing Islam, but his Baathist party was secular and didn't allow for any religous favoritism, abolishing Sharia law, a first for a nation in the persian gulf nation. Of course, after the the 1st Gulf War, when Iraq was collapsing at the seams under religous and ethnic strife, he did try to portray himself as a devout muslim and did try to build mosque, write own koran with blood. But that was for purely political survival, not cause he said one day "I'm not true to my faith and should strenghen it!"
Have you checked the most resent report of dead in Iraq? The Opinion Research Business, an independent polling agency, estimates the death at 1,033,000 deaths. The Lancet Study claimed 654,965. Figures aren't exact because exact numbers are hard to come by, as most only count deaths directly related to U.S. soldiers, not the collateral damage caused by the invasion. Death of US soldier is more accurate,3,972 dead. I will admit my minds been in other places, been ignoring the war lately, as its too disgusting. But rather its 10,000 dead or a million or 1,000 or 100, no one,US soldier or Iraqi, should be dead, as Iraq was never a threat, had no reason to attack,Hussein knew that it would be insane to mess with US, he still remember how the US fucked him up from the 1st Gulf War, he had no connection with bin Laden, and in fact they hated each other(bin Laden hated Hussein for his secularism, Hussein hated bin Laden, for his general antics bringing the US's attenion back to the mid east. Post a link,anything, that shows that Iraq is developing wmds or had a link with al-quaeda. Like the fuck you can't.

G. Most of the 10 million or so Iraqis displaced are closely linked to terror groups who had to displace themselves to avoid being killed due to the terrorist activities of their family members.

Do you know the guidelines for what the CIA considers a terrorist?
Really,its pretty broad, anyone that looks like a terrorist can get their ass thrown in Guantanomo or Abu Ghraib. Here's a secret: any fucking Muslim a terrorist in these assholes book. Most of the motherfuckers in Guantanomo Bay ain't got no connection to al quaeda, which originally had no connection to Iraq until after the invasion, when they use the chaos to build a small,but lethal base. And the reason that death squads and insurgent groups gained so much popularity is that after the US invasion, Iraqi government and society collapsed, and tragically, Muqtada al Sadr and his Mahdi army and similar Islamist groups stepped in to provide food,clothes, in return for support.

C. Remember Oil for fucking food program? Remember? The United Nations program administered by the United Nations for the express purpose of allowing sufficient trade to support the civilian population of Iraq?

Who stole the money from it? Saddam and the UN.

Got me on that one, but wouldn't it have been easier to simply remove the UN economic sanctions after the war? You know it would. Rather than say,choke Iraq to death with meager food rations, for oil. Saddam was a pretty big asshole,so was the UN, and Clinton,can't argue about that.

Bill Clinton wasn't a liberal, he's a centrist at best. If he is a liberal, what the fuck was Welfare Reform?

If the CIA is a bastion of liberal Democrats, why do so many stick around when Bush was elected?

D. Nobody exploited a "tragedy" to invade. We invaded because we had to and because the alternative was the status quo.

Than what the fuck was 9/11? Bush and his inner circle took a moderately large terrorist group,al quaeda, which had no support in any middle eastern state and were seen as piranhas,which when compared to other terrorist cells isn't much of a threat( the Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka are much more numerous and have a staunch anti-American streak) and blew it up into Nazis 2.0, made it seem that every middle eastern nation was out to get us,in some apocolyptic showdown. And what is the "status quo"? The "status quo" would be the US being respected in the world,not seen as the imperialistic Christian warrior it is now. Go back to sucking David Horrowitz dick.

Damn, Deangelo, could you help me tear this motherfucker to bits? If your listening.

Undercover Black Man said...

I think the writing of the lies would make good comedy. ... I'd do it like the Princess Bride where you enter the fantasy world of the story that's being told.

Hilarious idea, Susie.

DeAngelo Starnes said...

elle, you're getting into a debate with an individual who does nothing more than repeat what he heard on Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity.

Example of some drank-the-koolaid-ignorance:

"Most of the 10 million or so Iraqis displaced are closely linked to terror groups who had to displace themselves to avoid being killed due to the terrorist activities of their family members."

That's some silly shit backed by no credible evidence and anchored by the loaded term "terrorist."

That's like saying people move out of a crime-riddled neighborhood because they're closely linked to the Crips and Bloods who had to displace themselves to avoid being killed by the gang activities of their family members.

Now how many fallacies are present in that statement? Even if you don't accept there are fallacies present, how many presumptions do you have to make to accept that as a true statement?

I don't argue with people who resort to "conservative" or "liberal" cuz those terms don't mean shit to me. I look at policy support without resorting to trying to fit someone into a neat label.

Because then you get into hair-splitting. "I'm liberal on social issues but conservative on national security." What the fuck does that mean?

How about I believe in ... without resorting to labelling.

You stick to that tactic,then you force a talking-point-repeating muthafucka to deal with facts as opposed to unsupported allegations that sound good to the paranoid person.

Really, we gotta rise above the politics of fear. Why do you think this girl was able to write what some folks thought was some ground-breaking stuff? Fear, stereotypes.

When you deal in politics of fear, there's always an enemy. There's always a blame. And there's always a solution that depends on fucking somebody over as opposed to a diplomatic, cooperative solution. And that goes for domestic policies just as much as international.

A guy like memomachine is like a chihuahua barking at your heels. An irritant that you can easily dispose of with a swift kick.

elle, you beat that ass pretty good.

memo, if you want some more, let me know and I'll do the usual dissection of your bullshit.

DeAngelo Starnes said...

dj,

sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeiiiiiiiiiitttttt!!!

Is that better?:)))))

And Dave what's up with these goddamn letters I gotta type in to get my shit posted?

Rottin' in Denmark said...

everyone here knows you're a spambot, deangelo, and frankly we're tired of it.

Ray said...

That's the thing, IW. Reminds me of the Janet Cooke fiasco almost 30 years ago... "An 8-year-old heroin addict? Wow, those ghetto blacks sure live like animals, don't they?"


It's what fed the looter hysteria right after Katrina. "Babies being raped at the Superdome", "11 year old girl with her throat cut", "all-night running gun battles in the Convention Center", "thugs shooting at rescue helicopters".

It's what you'd expect from "those people" (the "thugs", the "brothas", "that element"...code, code, and code), since they live like animals anyway.

Except that it's not true, they don't really, and those things never happened.

I like the analogy somebody made to a man trying to write a fake memoir about a woman being raped. My best friend was gang-raped years ago, and we have talked a lot about the aftermath and the recovery. But once I tried to describe it in a short story I was writing, from the girl's point of view -- not even the rape, just the aftermath -- and I just couldn't do it. I couldn't make it real, I wouldn't know if it was real even if I got it right, because it's not something I've experienced and it's something that is deeply personal and painful and IMPORTANT to the people who have experienced it, so you have to get it RIGHT and you have to do it legit or you shouldn't do it at all.

David Simon wrote "The Corner", a hugely compelling non-fiction book about a year in the life of a black neighborhood in Baltimore infected by drugs, and he made it all the more compelling by removing himself from the story, rather than inserting himself, even though he was actually there to witness.

If Seltzer wanted to help her so-called friends, she could have done that and done some real good and produced some righteous reading. Instead she went the ego route. And got busted.

elle said...

thanks, Deangelo man,I never really thought about labels in that way, I will take your advice when I'm arguing with any future assholes. And from this day forth, I refuse to call myself a "liberal" "progressive" "centrist" whatever, there all just words at the end.

And memo, if you believe in Operation Iraqi freedom so much,why don't you and your buddy Rush and Tucker enlist their fatasses in the military and see the state of the country for your fucking self.

Bret LaGree said...

My favorite paragraph of the follow-up piece in the Times today: "Ms. Read [who wrote the profile of Seltzer for Times' Home section last week] said that she did contact Ms. Seltzer’s fiancé and also asked her to provide information about Uncle Madd Ronald, who Ms. Seltzer claimed was her gang leader and was now in prison. Ms. Seltzer provided a prison name and prison identification number, and a copy editor confirmed that the prison existed."

LostAngeles said...

"What amuses me most of all? That anyone actually believed Seltzer was half-Indian. I mean, whiskey tango foxtrot, just LOOK AT HER!"

Considering I've gotten the same about being born in this country and then told I'm lying about having been born in N.J....

Considering I've got people looking at me and going, "Of course you're Mexican/Egyptian/Hawaiian/Indian/Sicilian/etc" when I'm mixed...

Thanks, buddy.

Lola Gets said...

Damn, UBM! Dont hold anything back, ok?

This is my first time hearing of this book. Although it seems to have recieved some press, at least it didnt get as much as that Oprah fiasco, "A Million Little Pieces..." or that Cooke debacle, and winning a Pulitzer.

I always hate it when folks of other ethnicities come and try to tell Blacks "how it really is."

L

Cal said...

Do you think Oprah (or more accurately her crack research staff) would have fallen for this one? I'm sure this girl was mere days away from appearing on The Today Show, The View, 60 Minutes, etc.? This story would have been too good to pass up.

DeAngelo Starnes said...

rottin, I don't recall you having anything interesting or intelligent to say. So I'll take "your" tiredness for what it's worth, unless you can identify who "we" are.

Melody Wells said...

You're totally right. It would make for great comedy. Margaret Seltzer needs a Hollywood agent.

Ellen Page is too young to me. You need someone who looks a little hardened and cynical and slightly crazy like Seltzer herself.

dj said...

"dj,

sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeiiiiiiiiiitttttt!!!

Is that better?:)))))"

Not type casting ya Mr.Starnes,just "Gee Whiz" seemed out of character from what I've read of you so far.

However,anytime someone drawls out "sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeiiiiiiiiiitttttt!", I do think of Isiah Whitlock Jr. in 25th Hour.

I know he is in The Wire as well,but I am 5 seasons late in finding out about this show and have to wait for the time and money to play catch up with the DVD's.
Can you hook me up and get him to sign my copy of Gremlins 2?LOL

memomachine said...

Hmmmm.

@ DeAngelo Starnes

These fucking labels of "conservative," "neocon," "moderate," "neoliberal," and "liberal" are complete and utter nonsense. More shortcut labelling that do nothing more than prejudice someone from the words uttered from the labelled person's mouth. Which leads to more namecalling. Just say how you feel about an issue and let your thoughts determine agreement or disagreement. Gee whiz."

I disagree. It's not about labelling. It's offering a shorthand description on personal politics. When I describe myself as a "fiscal conservative" that tells you pretty much everything about my views.

*shrug* Do you describe yourself as:

A. Black?

B. Negro?

C. African-American?

D. American?

E. African-American descended from people who used to live in Botswana?

They're labels but they're used mostly to self-describe.

memomachine said...

Hmmmm.

@ elle

"True, Saddam Husein wasn't a atheist, what I meant was a agnostic,not actively practicing Islam, but his Baathist party was secular and didn't allow for any religous favoritism, abolishing Sharia law, a first for a nation in the persian gulf nation."

A. ???? An **agnostic**? Someone who has a Koran written using his own blood is being described as an **agnostic**?

B. Sharia law was actually abolished in 1925 in Iraq by, I think, an elected democratic government that was subsequently overthrown by the British who then installed a monarchy.

But Saddam had nothing to do with abolishing Sharia law.

"Of course, after the the 1st Gulf War, when Iraq was collapsing at the seams under religous and ethnic strife, he did try to portray himself as a devout muslim and did try to build mosque, write own koran with blood."

Ahhh. I see you've found Wikipedia. Congrats!

Actually Saddam really didn't give a fuck about what was going on in Iraq itself. The Kurds and Shittes were being terrorized and the Sunni were helping Saddam for a cut of the oil money.

The propaganda was to influence how the rest of the muslim world viewed Saddam.

"But that was for purely political survival, not cause he said one day "I'm not true to my faith and should strenghen it!""

Saddam's survival in Iraq depended on kidnapping, murder and rape. Not politics.

"Have you checked the most resent report of dead in Iraq? The Opinion Research Business, an independent polling agency, estimates the death at 1,033,000 deaths."

Ahh the utterly trustworthy leftist source designed to make any silly argument seem like it's actually relevant.

Yeah. "Independent". "Polling".

I'd go through all the reasons why this is bullshit but there really aren't enough hours in the day.

"The Lancet Study claimed 654,965."

ROFLMAO!!!

And the Lancet study was completely discredited because it was completely made up bullshit. The only people who bother with that "study" are liberals looking for a crutch in a debate.

"Figures aren't exact because exact numbers are hard to come by, as most only count deaths directly related to U.S. soldiers, not the collateral damage caused by the invasion. Death of US soldier is more accurate,3,972 dead."

Then there's also the charming habit that people have in the Middle East of claiming lives lost in the hope of a cash payout.

US forces operating in Iraq carry along a checkbook to pay for damages to property and to pay claims for injuries or even death that results from combat operations.

It's pretty common to vastly inflate damage claims. Or haven't you ever heard of the "Massacre of Jenin"?

LOL.

"I will admit my minds been in other places, been ignoring the war lately, as its too disgusting. But rather its 10,000 dead or a million or 1,000 or 100, no one,US soldier or Iraqi, should be dead ..."

It's a nice sentiment but really nothing more than a "bunnies and butterflies" sort of thing. People are dying because other people are attacking.

Let's face facts. The US has no desire to be in Iraq. The only reason we're still in Iraq is to help them along. If there were no terrorism in Iraq, there wouldn't be any troops there either.

", as Iraq was never a threat, had no reason to attack,Hussein knew that it would be insane to mess with US, he still remember how the US fucked him up from the 1st Gulf War"

Which is why Saddam was a growing terrorist threat. Saddam realized that fighting a conventional war against the US was suicide. But supporting terrorists isn't a conventional war and is something that he thought he could get away with.

And ultimately why we deposed and executed him.

", he had no connection with bin Laden, and in fact they hated each other(bin Laden hated Hussein for his secularism, Hussein hated bin Laden, for his general antics bringing the US's attenion back to the mid east."

What complete nonsense. You don't have to like someone to be aligned with them. Look at Texas. A great many Republicans voted for Hillary to fuck up the Democratic primary.

You think Republicans *like* Hillary Clinton?

"Post a link,anything, that shows that Iraq is developing wmds or had a link with al-quaeda. Like the fuck you can't."

Ta-Dah!

Telegraph.co.uk

"G. Most of the 10 million or so Iraqis displaced are closely linked to terror groups who had to displace themselves to avoid being killed due to the terrorist activities of their family members."

BTW I forgot to call bullshit on this. If "10,000,000" Iraqis were displaced then that would amount to about 35% of the entire population.

The reality is that about 1,000,000 Iraqis are displaced. Not "10,000,000".

"Do you know the guidelines for what the CIA considers a terrorist?"

Why should I care what the bureaucratic definition of a terrorist is? How is this at all relevant?

"Really,its pretty broad, anyone that looks like a terrorist can get their ass thrown in Guantanomo or Abu Ghraib."

A. Actually you have to do something. I assure you that if you stood on a street corner in Manhattan dressed in a burka the CIA would not send you to Cuba.

B. Abu Ghraib was handed back to the Iraqis about 1-2 years ago. The CIA has nothing to do with Abu Ghraib.

"Here's a secret: any fucking Muslim a terrorist in these assholes book."

Ok now that you're getting spanked you're exaggerating.

"Most of the motherfuckers in Guantanomo Bay ain't got no connection to al quaeda, which originally had no connection to Iraq until after the invasion, when they use the chaos to build a small,but lethal base."

A. The people in the "G" are some of the most hardened terrorists in the world. Of those recently released from there and given their freedom at least a dozen have returned to jihad and were killed either in Iraq or Afghanistan.

B. I posted the connection between Iraq and AQ.

C. Iraq has been the graveyard of AQ.

Prior to Iraq AQ had a very high 90% approval rating in the muslim world. But 5 years of AQ bombing and murdering Iraqis has turned this around and now it seems the majority of the muslim world disapproves of AQ.

"And the reason that death squads and insurgent groups gained so much popularity is that after the US invasion, Iraqi government and society collapsed, and tragically, Muqtada al Sadr and his Mahdi army and similar Islamist groups stepped in to provide food,clothes, in return for support."

Wrong again.

A. Iraqi government was corrupt and untrustworthy and had to be dissolved.

B. There was NO Iraqi society. It was a thugocracy based on murder and nothing else.

C. Al-Sadr offered nothing more than gang membership during a very turbulent time. Times have gotten better and so Al-Sadr's powerbase has begun to disappear.

"Got me on that one, but wouldn't it have been easier to simply remove the UN economic sanctions after the war? You know it would. Rather than say,choke Iraq to death with meager food rations, for oil. Saddam was a pretty big asshole,so was the UN, and Clinton,can't argue about that."

Which war? The Gulf War that left Saddam in charge? That would've been foolish.

The OIF, Operation Iraqi Freedom?? The UN Sanctions were lifted after that.

"Bill Clinton wasn't a liberal, he's a centrist at best. If he is a liberal, what the fuck was Welfare Reform?"

Oh come on now! The 1990's weren't that long ago!

Bill Clinton took credit for the fact that the Republican lead Congress forced Welfare Reform on him. The "Welfare Reform" that Clinton proposed, and that the Democrats liked, was useless and watered down. The Republicans fought like mad, introduced the "Contract with America" and clubbed Clinton like a baby seal until he gave in.

"If the CIA is a bastion of liberal Democrats, why do so many stick around when Bush was elected?
"


A. Many are not political appointees but instead are career employees.

B. What do you think? Why do you think Democrats in Congress were so eager for the US to invade Iraq?

B.1. Because a Democrat controlled CIA could make the justification for war.

B.2. Because Democrats in Congress could give Bush the authorization for war.

B.3. Because then Democrats would have the Iraq war, and the ensuing casualties, as a political weapon.

B.4. Why do you think so very few Congressional Democrats even bothered to read the justifications for invading Iraq? Because they didn't really give a damn. They saw having a Republican initiated war as a bonus.

"Than what the fuck was 9/11? Bush and his inner circle took a moderately large terrorist group,al quaeda, which had no support in any middle eastern state and were seen as piranhas,which when compared to other terrorist cells isn't much of a threat( the Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka are much more numerous and have a staunch anti-American streak) and blew it up into Nazis 2.0, made it seem that every middle eastern nation was out to get us,in some apocolyptic showdown. "

A. Nobody in the Bush administration linked 9/11 with Iraq. The only people who did that were liberal Democrats.

B. You have either a really shitty memory or a superbly underwhelming knowledge of these subjects.

AQ was the most dangerous terror group out that and had successfully attacked US embassies and forces all over the world.

C. AQ was, until Iraq, very popular in muslim countries.

"And what is the "status quo"? The "status quo" would be the US being respected in the world,not seen as the imperialistic Christian warrior it is now. Go back to sucking David Horrowitz dick."

A. Fuck you.

B. Kiss my ass.

C. Respected? Bullshit. A lot of countries made a pretense of being friends shortly after 9/11. But let's face facts. That "friendliness" dried up like a fucking prune in just a couple days.

You want to rely on other countries? Good fucking luck.

"Damn, Deangelo, could you help me tear this motherfucker to bits? If your listening."

Good luck with that.

memomachine said...

Hmmmm.

@ DeAngelo Starnes

"elle, you're getting into a debate with an individual who does nothing more than repeat what he heard on Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity."

Ding! Wrong on the very first try.

A. I don't listen to Limbaugh because he bores me.

B. Hannity is absolutely lousy at debating and watching him try is painful.

"That's some silly shit backed by no credible evidence and anchored by the loaded term "terrorist.""

Nope it's really true. Most of the displaced Iraqis are Sunni who've left villages and neighborhoods because of relatives of past victims looking for revenge and because of Sunni lead terrorism and death squads aimed at Kurds and Shittes.

"That's like saying people move out of a crime-riddled neighborhood because they're closely linked to the Crips and Bloods who had to displace themselves to avoid being killed by the gang activities of their family members."

No it's more like family members of Crips and Bloods having to flee parts of Los Angeles because of attacks by hispanic gangs looking to clean out some new territory.

And you know that's happening.

"Now how many fallacies are present in that statement? Even if you don't accept there are fallacies present, how many presumptions do you have to make to accept that as a true statement?"

Since it IS a true statement.

That's your problem.

"I don't argue with people who resort to "conservative" or "liberal" cuz those terms don't mean shit to me. I look at policy support without resorting to trying to fit someone into a neat label."

Congrats!

"Because then you get into hair-splitting. "I'm liberal on social issues but conservative on national security." What the fuck does that mean?"

It means you're a neo-con.

"How about I believe in ... without resorting to labelling."

Because then it devolves into a game of 50 questions.

Such labels are a convenient shorthand. That's it.

"You stick to that tactic,then you force a talking-point-repeating muthafucka to deal with facts as opposed to unsupported allegations that sound good to the paranoid person."

Ok then. *shrug* you may think this is some sort of dramatic statement but really it isn't.

"Really, we gotta rise above the politics of fear. Why do you think this girl was able to write what some folks thought was some ground-breaking stuff? Fear, stereotypes."

Nope. Because that stereotype is near and dear to the liberal heart. Because it means that blacks *need* the gentle guidance of liberals in government.

"When you deal in politics of fear, there's always an enemy. There's always a blame. And there's always a solution that depends on fucking somebody over as opposed to a diplomatic, cooperative solution. And that goes for domestic policies just as much as international."

Nice statement. Not relevant to the discussions, but nice.

"A guy like memomachine is like a chihuahua barking at your heels. An irritant that you can easily dispose of with a swift kick."

*shrug* so far you've been remarkably unsuccessful in debating me over anything. All you've ever done is what elle has tried to do.

Offer unsubstantiated opinion as fact and gotten your ass handed to you for doing so.

"elle, you beat that ass pretty good."

ROFLMAO!

"memo, if you want some more, let me know and I'll do the usual dissection of your bullshit."

The usual ineffective presentation of nonsense?

*shrug* if you want to. Just try not to continually bore the fuck out of me.

memomachine said...

Hmmmmm.

@ elle

"thanks, Deangelo man,I never really thought about labels in that way, I will take your advice when I'm arguing with any future assholes. And from this day forth, I refuse to call myself a "liberal" "progressive" "centrist" whatever, there all just words at the end."

Good luck with that.

I really don't see the point. But if it makes you happy.

"And memo, if you believe in Operation Iraqi freedom so much,why don't you and your buddy Rush and Tucker enlist their fatasses in the military and see the state of the country for your fucking self."

Ahhh the old "chickenhawk" nonsense.

A. You know it amuses me a lot because so many blacks want the US to intervene in Darfur and other African areas. So I hope you're ready for that to be used against you when you're calling for US troops to be deployed.

B. Quite a few conservatives have joined up to fight in Iraq and/or Afghanistan.

C. As a 44 year old man with congestive heart failure and kidney failure I seriously doubt I'd be accepted. Though I did do a tour a a US Marine when I was 17.

One of the things I promised myself was to repay America's kindness for taking me in and making me a citizen by enlisting in the military. So when I graduated high school I got permission from my parents and enlisted in the US Marines as a rifleman.

Sometimes I wish I had stayed in and done my 30 rather than having left and gone into computer programming.

So. How about you? Are you ready for the chickenhawk challenge for when you find a cause worth championing?

elle said...

memo, I'm done arguing with you, its a waste of time and you clearly suffer from diarhea of the mouth. You can type alot, you can use as many $10 words as you want,but you don't show any proof to back up what you say. When I pointed out the estimated # of people that may have died,I pointed out an actually survey,The Lancet survey,and the OBD survey,and they have not been discredited,they are not partisan(what stake does a independent logistical group in London and a medical journal that is only known in medical circles have? They were objective as can be) They are the most comprehensive. Furthermore,can you provide any proof your numbers are correct?(thats objective and not some partisan smear job)
Inigo Gilmore says there are weapons of mass destruction,okay where are they?
Some famous examples of people that suffered from this is William Buckley,Ronald Reagan,Milton Friedman,everyone at the Kato Institute, and a whole host of others.
C. Respected? Bullshit. A lot of countries made a pretense of being friends shortly after 9/11. But let's face facts. That "friendliness" dried up like a fucking prune in just a couple days.

The US has an estimated 10,000 to 20,000 nukes, we have the best in weapon system,nuclear subs stationed the world over, you actually believe anyone could fuck with us? Even nations that genuinely hate us knew that would be suicidal. We destroyed Iraq the one of the "axis of evil" nations in under 3 weeks. Our military bases are stationed every where. Why don't you get out of your cave, go to other nations,talk to the people, and get their opinion wiether than get your opinions from TV. The people responsible for 9/11, al quaeda,acted on their own without the help of any nations. Islamism isn't widespread in the middle east. I have a crazy idea, why don't you meet some middle easterners and talk to them?
I hope you can get help for diarhea of the mouth, its spreading equally among both progressives and conservatives, I enjoyed pissing you off and fucking with you though. You can respond but I won't listen, I'm about to have sex with a woman,something thats probably alien to you. Good Day.

Angie said...

I am a white girl and I just have to say: I fucking love you for writing this. Thank you so much.

You mentioned how chapter one was just something you could get from watching movies and playing into stereotypes, so what exactly made it stand out to the editors/seem true? Well, what I got from the original article in the Times was this sniffing condescension of what makes it so different is that, you know, she talks about love and family and, as we all know, gang members feel no human emotions! That's why all the call-backs to her "brothers" and "Big Moms" and other family-like details. Heck, look at the cover. Older black woman cradles young white girl. The way all good Mammys should.

And let's also not forget that she had to add into her story that shew was half Native. Why? What does that have to do with ANYTHING? Oh, nothing besides she needed some minority CRED so, heck, why not, like, Indian? Who knows anything about those redskins?

And here's what I want to know. She claims to have a giant tat of a bulldog weeping on her back. Where's the picture of that, hmmm? Oh, you never asked her to show it to you? Gosh, there's some editing. Even the idea that she was doing this "so people would listen!" without even understanding the deep racial problems contained within that very statement and how she was feeding INTO them is maddening. Also, has someone bothered to check on all her intense volunteering time working to reduce gang violence/for the poor Negroes wherein they confessed to her of their noble, GRITTY struggles in da 'hood? Yeah, didn't think so.

Seriously love this post. Thanks so much.

(oh, and memo, I don't like to troll in people's comments, especially with someone as dumb as you? But, since I know how deeply you care about THE TRUE FACTS, you'd better check yourself on what you think Rigoberta Menchu won her Nobel Prize for. Hint: It wasn't Literature, genius. But, hey, you're too busy thinking you're clever by bashing her to bother with, uh, the truth, right?)

Undercover Black Man said...

Older black woman cradles young white girl. The way all good Mammys should.

On point, Angie! Thank you for reading and commenting.

As for her tattoo... the most startling thing I read in today's NYT follow-up story is that the editor, Sarah McGrath, says she never met the author during the three years she edited the manuscript.

Never saw her face-to-face.

That seems so unlikely to me. With a story this unusual? With a manuscript that could be so hot?

McGrath never bought her a meal? Penguin never flew Peggy to New York in gratitude, so she could see the sights?

I've gotta get hold of one of Peggy Seltzer's radio interviews. Because presumably her "ghetto" accent help her with the ruse. But I bet she sounds pretty ridiculous when she says "homie" and "the hood" out of her mouth.

DeAngelo Starnes said...

dj, touche'. I've found myself saying "Gee whiz" a lot lately. I better check my own credentials.

Thought you might like that comeback though.

Dave, I think myself, memo, and elle got a little off track from the topic.

But since our boy is so fucking smart, let's allow memo to pick the next Stakes Be High question.

If he's got the heart.

BTW, memo well-used "Ding!"

elle, I hope it was good. I'm up writing a goddamn brief and needed some entertainment.

jackparsons said...

The Honkey in South Central bit seems to be played a lot, but the half-breed angle cracks me up. Okay, folks, this is step one: half-Indian. I know that every white person (and quite a few blacks I've talked to too... and Dominicans... and...) has a Cherokee princess in their family tree, but this shit isn't that hard to figure out. THERE AIN'T THAT MANY OF THEM. Name your tribe and your last name and you can be immediately placed or outed. Indian reservations are tiny. If you don't know the person, you almost certainly know their uncle, cousin, brother, etc.

The hilarious thing about this is that this chick Peggy ("Peggy"... el-oh-el) has apparently been known for quite awhile as a faker. I'm trying to work out the chain here, and this is what I can piece together:

1. She claims to be part Indian, but that shit doesn't really fly in the Pac Northwest, where there are a lot more Indians than in, say, Sherman Oaks, California. So she invents a gangbangin' profile to impress her college buddies. It isn't really that uncommon among white kids in the 'burbs to claim to be hardass gangbangers two towns over.

2. She'd taken acting lessons in high school (there's photos from her Sherman Oakes yearbook on pagesix.com... lulz). Eugene = hippiedom. She was clearly a performing arts declasse. Her hippie teachers bought the honkey princess from the hood schtick hook line and sinker and began doing their best Edward James Olmos impression, coaxing the genius from this fragile ghetto daffodil.

3. Some of those connections actually pay off. She meets a few darrrrlings of the rad lit sect, fashionable in spite of being poorly read. Inga introduces her to McGrath. McGrath sees $. C'mon, why has damn near every movie about Indians starred a white dude? This shit is Little Big Man all over again! You've got the kidnapped honkey princess transplanted with the savages, and she emerges from the other end to tell her former society about life in the wilderness. Benefit: she's utterly non-threatening, i.e. white. YOU CAN SELL THIS BITCH TO COSMO!

This began, hilariously, as a typical product of the teenage wasteland, hating her boring life and looking to spice it up with tales of her savage Indian parentage (spread no doubt when she was in California as a kid) and then her tough life down with the bruddas in el ghetto. I'll just leave aside all of the shit about gullible intellectuals from Eugene to New York who bought this shit. That's self-explanatory and I just don't have to the timing down to make it even funnier than it is on the surface.

jackparsons said...

Awesome. She's in the DELETE FUCKING EVERYTHING mode, but Google Cache still has most of it.

MySpace: http://tinyurl.com/yrsg5a

Someone was asking about Oprah? Her comment: "As seen in OPrah Magazine!! Oh I think they like me!!!"

Also: "Basically, although I may have seen and experienced things many couldn't ever imagine, I am not to different from anyone else. The less concrete things:I believe in God. I believe that life doesn't always make sense, but that if you just put one foot in front of the other and turn right each time you hit a wall, you will in the end be successful. I believe that Bloods and CRIPS are not each others enemies. We are just in a long standing conflict with one another. We share the same social conditions and problems."

It's really beautiful that she could embrace her enemies in such a way.

memomachine said...

Hmmmmm.

@ elle

"memo, I'm done arguing with you, its a waste of time and you clearly suffer from diarhea of the mouth."

Actually I'm typing this.

"You can type alot, you can use as many $10 words as you want,but you don't show any proof to back up what you say."

You must have missed those links I provided.

"When I pointed out the estimated # of people that may have died,I pointed out an actually survey,The Lancet survey,and the OBD survey,and they have not been discredited,they are not partisan(what stake does a independent logistical group in London and a medical journal that is only known in medical circles have?"

The Lancet survey *was* in fact discredited.

National Journal

You can find many more examples by using Google.

Now why was it discredited?

A. They used Iraqi stringers, i.e. part time help, to assemble the information. In other words there is/was no credible way to ensure that these surveys were actually filled out by people other than the stringers *and* there was no fact checking to ensure that any survey filled out was at all credible.

B. They took a very small survey an then extrapolated it across the entire population of Iraq.

I.e. they assumed that if 25% of the surveys reported a family member dead then 25% of ALL families in Iraq must have a family member dead.

I'm sure you can see how very dumb that is.

"They were objective as can be) They are the most comprehensive. Furthermore,can you provide any proof your numbers are correct?(thats objective and not some partisan smear job)"

Simple: They refuse to release their raw data.

The basis for science is peer-review. The basis for peer-review is the release of raw data. No raw data, no peer-review. No peer-review then it's simply bullshit.

"Inigo Gilmore says there are weapons of mass destruction,okay where are they?"

No idea. Let's ask Bill Clinton.

"Some famous examples of people that suffered from this is William Buckley,Ronald Reagan,Milton Friedman,everyone at the Kato Institute, and a whole host of others."

And Bill Clinton, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, etc.

"The US has an estimated 10,000 to 20,000 nukes, we have the best in weapon system,nuclear subs stationed the world over, you actually believe anyone could fuck with us?"

Which is why terrorism is such an attractive option. It costs relatively peanut and it offers a way of attacking a nation without having to suffer the consequences for it.

If it were YOUR job to determine a strategy for attacking America would you:

A. Announce it on CNN and bravely await the JDAMs the USAF would be flinging your way?

B. Give covert support to terrorists to attack America, damage it's economy and leave you without any culpability?

Tell me you wouldn't choose "A".

"Even nations that genuinely hate us knew that would be suicidal."

See above.

"We destroyed Iraq the one of the "axis of evil" nations in under 3 weeks. Our military bases are stationed every where."

Which proves my point yet again.

"Why don't you get out of your cave, go to other nations,talk to the people, and get their opinion wiether than get your opinions from TV."

Funny thing that. I do that on a regular basis when I call my relatives.

"The people responsible for 9/11, al quaeda,acted on their own without the help of any nations."

Bullshit. Terrorists need several things to operate:

A. Money.

B. A place to safely train new recruits.

C. New recruits.

D. Weapons, explosives and supporting equipment and skills, such as the ability to counterfeit passports.

All of these require either the active participation of a state actor -or- the willful blindness by one.

During the 1970's every terrorist group was able to use the USSR for training, as a source of money, equipment and things such as counterfeit passports.

"Islamism isn't widespread in the middle east. I have a crazy idea, why don't you meet some middle easterners and talk to them?"

Islamism isn't as widespread as it used to be *because* muslims were shown that terrorists are dangerous to everyone. Prior to that Islamism *was* very popular and still in many ways *is* popular.

However Islamism is much more popular in the West. And that's the fault of liberals.

"I hope you can get help for diarhea of the mouth, its spreading equally among both progressives and conservatives, I enjoyed pissing you off and fucking with you though."

ROFLMAO!!!

You vastly overrate yourself.

I assure you the ultimate demarcation between conservatives and liberals is that we conservatives routinely conduct throughly bloody debates. It's actually rather amusing to see a liberal show up and engage in a conservative debate.

Don't mistake me. I'm not suggesting that liberals cannot debate, I don't believe that at all. However the problem is that most liberals simply accept some things are true without debating them. Frankly I think liberals have lost the desire to debate, which really is a shame.

"You can respond but I won't listen, I'm about to have sex with a woman,something thats probably alien to you. Good Day."

Oooooh. And she's a model too ... made of rubber! :)

Seriously. THAT is the best you can do? I know I'm happy you're getting laid, but I think that's the kind of personal information that I don't need you to share.

memomachine said...

Hmmmm.

@ angie

"(oh, and memo, I don't like to troll in people's comments, especially with someone as dumb as you? But, since I know how deeply you care about THE TRUE FACTS, you'd better check yourself on what you think Rigoberta Menchu won her Nobel Prize for. Hint: It wasn't Literature, genius. But, hey, you're too busy thinking you're clever by bashing her to bother with, uh, the truth, right?)"

Well son of a gun! Thanks!

No idea why I thought her Nobel was for Literature. Perhaps the association with her book was the reason.

What's really fucked up though is that there is absolutely no mention of her being discredited on the Nobel web page.

Then again considering how craptacular the Nobel Prize for Peace has become, is it really any wonder?

memomachine said...

Hmmmmm.

@ DeAngelo Starnes

"But since our boy is so fucking smart, let's allow memo to pick the next Stakes Be High question."

I would gladly accept such a proposal.

But I think the question I have in mind would force you to consider something that I doubt you've really wanted to confront.

Undercover Black Man said...

^ Email it to me, memo:

undercoverblackman (at) mac (dot) com

Undercover Black Man said...

MySpace: http://tinyurl.com/yrsg5a

Splendid, jackparsons!

memomachine said...

Hmmmmm.

@ UBM

"^ Email it to me, memo:"

I will do so tomorrow morning. I want to think about it some.

Thanks!

memomachine said...

Hmmmm.

@ UBM

Hi. I sent that Stakes Be High to you. Please feel free to criticize or send it back for re-work.

Anonymous said...

Angie,I found the Native American bit redundant and suspect as well.Seriously.She did not look "nary" a bit Native American to me either. She looked full-blooded/blown white.Her being Jewish is plausible although there are Jews I have come across that have more pronounced features. Than again other groups got folks that can pass for other stuff. So go figure. But I will admit that there are people that can pass for white but be of many backgrounds. But many supposed white people that are mixed have features about them that give intermixture sans Keanu Reeves(half Polynesian),Angelina Jolie(one quarter Native American), and Shannon Sossamon(Filipino) and several other things if she claims solely European ancestry.
Also, for the observation about liberals, being one myself, I will be the first to say they have paternalistic views towards blacks and other minorities, groups,etc.. But most mainstream point of views have this flaw; and most people perceive things and support works that support their own point of view.I also do not feel conservatives see the world as it is. They see it from the slant of a their own point of view the same way people always find stories to support their point of view.
In terms of this not getting the press it should have in some spaces I can understand why it did not. Cultural appropriation is so common that stuff like this barely raises eyebrows if you are bombarded with these issues all the time. I DO think this is serious and it deserve press, elimination of practice and everything else though. This phenomenon is not new nor limited to her. Black/red/yellow/brownface wasn't that long ago. These practices still happen today. You see this phenomenon on college campuses all across the country with its tiki parties, ghetto parties, barrio parties, and even the toga parties to a small extent. All the other shameless examples speak for themselves but I even find this a little wierd because Italians and Greeks were treated like slightly less white/barely first class citizens(though probably not second in comparison to minorities a while back) than WASPS not to long ago and to some extent still now in a few cases even if they are not looked down as much as minorities(and even though they have higher status).Here they are honoring Greeks and Romans of long ago while treating their descendants of today like barely wanted stepchildren. It goes without saying that minorities are a whole 'nother family altogether. The fact that stuff like this happen so frequently though is what makes it so bad.
Anyway, all these plagiarist and fakes in journalism and book writing are getting old:; and need to quit!

Undercover Black Man said...

^ Thanks, anon.

LennieG said...

Their obsession with black folks is scary at best.

S.O.L. said...

UBM, I knew you'd be on to this. Frankly, I'm surprised there hasn't been more outrage. To me the most disturbing part is how blase Ms. Fucking Liar was in her interview with the New York Times, as if what she did was no big deal. It's like MISTER Fucking Liar (Stephen Glass) saying he was doing a service to journalism. I just don't understand how anyone could feel sorry for these people. I don't get it. They defend their abhorrent behavior in a way that clearly underlies their low opinion of everybody else's intelligence even though an idiot could see that that THE ONLY POSSIBLE REASON FOR THEM WRITING FICTION AS TRUTH IS FOR MONEY AND FAME.

FUCKING LYING LIARS!

(Why doesn't that make me feel better?)

I read the excerpts too and my first thought was "this is hackneyed writing." I'm no freaking genius and I certainly didn't grow up in South Central and yet I didn't believe a fucking word of it. McGrath wanted to believe it so bad she couldn't even see how bad it was. I mean it was one well-trodden stereotype after another. I totally understand your anger. I feel the same way -- and I can't get over it. I want to punch somebody.

There are two kinds of "publishing stars" that I hate: people who fuck up their own lives and write about them -- despite having no discernible writing talent. And people who fictionalize their lives and write about it as if it were true.

The question: is she going to fade into the obscurity of a punch line or is she going to get a huge check to publish her REAL memoir?

And what is the consequence of this lying anyway? I assume you have to give back your advance and there's public humility I guess and I hope to God that Penguin sues her ass, but if you get caught robbing a bank you risk going to jail. What are we to do with these lying hack wannabe so-called writers?

I cannot believe how much this is simmering in my gut. Thanks for giving me a chance to blow off some steam, UMB.

Shout out to Rotten in Denmark for the term "Freyettes" by the way. Love that.

jim treacher said...

Now aside from having perpetrated this mis-identity, how is Ms. Seltzer different from ya boy Dave Simon?

That's a pretty big "aside from," isn't it? Seeing as how perpetrating that mis-identity is the whole reason it blew up in her face.

I am not Star Jones said...

Has Sarah McGrath resigned yet? And the agent has she dropped into South Central to hand out apology baskets?

I wonder what these three women plan to do in the aftermath of them attempting to profit from the 'others' pain and pathology under the guise of helping.

That's what makes me angriest
in three months everyone would have forgotten what they tried to do in the course of them living their lives and pursuing their crooked vision of the American Dream and it makes me want to scream.

I'm done. Thanks for your posts on the book and ever so lovingly giving Inga Muscio something to think about other than telling the world she's an anti-racist.