Evacuations and Contingency Planning

A very interesting post from www.Stratfor.com about evacuations. This follows this post about Russia's threats.  This follows this article about American energy independence and preventing money from going to hostile countries such as Iran . For more about what is happening in the nation now click hereand read a very interesting book HERE.


Evacuations and Contingency Planning

Stratfor

By Scott Stewart



When the London 2012 Paralympic Games conclude the week of Sept. 9, the British navy reportedly will send a task force to the Eastern Mediterranean Sea, where it will participate in amphibious exercises off the coasts of Albania, Sardinia and Turkey before lingering off the coast of Cyprus.



Ostensibly, the upcoming exercises are meant to prepare the navy for evacuating Syria of British citizens. Indeed, the ongoing civil war in Syria has prompted several Western countries to consider evacuation plans for their citizens who remain in the war-torn country. Some countries already have issued travel warnings against Syria, while others have advised their citizens to vacate the country. The United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, France and Germany have closed their embassies in Syria and are less able to assist their citizens there.



Foreign nationals should take full advantage of their governments' evacuation assistance regardless of the country in which they temporarily reside; British citizens in Syria are no exception. However, government planning is no substitute for personal evacuation plans, which are vital for any citizen in a foreign country.



Evacuation Planning

Evacuation plans are essential for all expatriates who live in developing countries, including diplomats, businessmen, aid workers and seasonal residents. Natural disasters, mob violence from civil disturbances, terrorism and war can all precipitate evacuations. Natural disasters, such as the 2010 earthquake in Haiti or the 2004 tsunami in Asia, erupt suddenly, while other events, such as the civil unrest in Syria, develop slowly. The latter instances give foreign citizens ample opportunity to leave; in Syria, foreign governments encouraged their citizens to vacate months ago. But even in such situations, events that require evacuation can occur abruptly, which leaves expatriates little time to plan their exits.



The potential for evacuation is not confined to developing countries. Many foreigners fled Japan following the March 2011 earthquake that damaged a nuclear power plant in Fukushima, and the 2010 wildfires in Moscow prompted a sudden and massive evacuation. No one expected the fires to worsen so quickly.



Since the potential for evacuation is nearly universal, expatriates are best served preparing an evacuation plan before a crisis erupts. Foreign embassies often will assist evacuation efforts -- expatriates are encouraged to register with their respective embassies and foreign ministries -- but foreign citizens should not rely on their governments to do their planning for them.



The reason for this is twofold. First, it may take some time for a government to execute its evacuation plans. In other instances, governments might not have an embassy to coordinate such efforts. Expatriates should take advantage of any evacuation procedures offered by their government, but they should not rely solely on those plans.



Nor should they rely on the plans of allied governments. Countries like the United States, the United Kingdom and France often will work with their allies in evacuation scenarios. However, every country will focus its efforts on the safety of its respective citizenry. So even in friendly countries, foreign citizens need to be responsible for their own security.



Evacuation situations involve more than merely showing up at the airport or seaport and departing. Usually, evacuations entail a great deal of bureaucracy and delay. It is not uncommon for expatriates to stay at an airport or seaport for a day or longer as they wait for their governments to arrange safe departure with the host government, rebel forces or both. Moreover, evacuation procedures will depend on the crisis. In most cases, commercial airliners, sea crafts or land transport will facilitate evacuations. Despite what is portrayed in the movies, military forces and helicopters are used only in very rare situations.



In any case, expatriates will be expected to pay for their own transportation out of the country. If they do not have the cash up front, they will be required to sign a promissory note to reimburse their government. They also are allowed to carry on only one small bag and are not allowed to bring pets. Therefore, many prefer to arrange their own transportation out of the country.



Personal evacuation plans usually require departure before the situation becomes too critical to leave. Thus, an important element of any evacuation plan is to establish criteria that, if met, will put the plan into action. While it is often prudent to leave a place before the situation deteriorates and your government orders an evacuation, some people wait until the very last minute to leave or decide to shelter in place and ride the crisis out.



Another important element of an evacuation plan is preparing a fly-away kit. This is a small bag or backpack that contains the basic things a person or family will require during an evacuation. Obviously, the most important things you need are your identification papers, money and credit cards (which should be kept in sealable plastic bags to keep them dry) and a cell phone or other means of communication. But a fly-away kit should also contain important items, such as a change of clothes, toiletry items, a jacket or something warm to wear, prescriptions or other required medications, a first aid kit, a smoke hood, a flashlight, drinking water, non-perishable food, duct tape, a multi-tool knife and perhaps even something to read -- again, evacuation usually entails a great deal of waiting. The idea of the fly-away kit is to have most of the items assembled in the bag so that one can quickly gather any remaining items, such as medicines, documents and money, before departure.



Maintaining important papers like passports, birth certificates, marriage certificates, immunization records and credit card information in one secure file allows foreign citizens to grab the file quickly prior to departure. Expatriates must make sure that their travel documents are not expired and that they have the appropriate visas if their plan requires traveling to an adjacent country. Keeping copies of important documents in a separate, secure place is also a good idea lest the originals be lost or stolen.



An expatriate's means of departure and evacuation routes should be prearranged, but they should not be inflexible. Evacuation plans should include several routes and alternative modes of transportation. In some cases, transportation hubs -- the international airport, for example -- may be closed, or an earthquake may have destroyed the bridge on an escape route. Such scenarios require an alternative plan.



If an entire company or a family is vacating a country, every member of the group needs to understand the plan and know what to do in such a situation. If you are working for a multinational corporation you need to clearly understand your company's policies and what they will and will not do to assist you. Many companies purchase commercial medical and emergency evacuation insurance policies for their employees.



Communications are frequently unavailable during a crisis, but knowing that all the members of your family or staff know your evacuation plan -- and are abiding by it -- will help reduce the stress of not being able to communicate with them. It also allows each individual to focus on his or her immediate tasks. If you wait to implement the plan until you have communicated with every member of your family or staff, it could be too late to make it out. An evacuation plan must also account for ways to communicate with your family overseas and to your government. Alternative means of communication, such as satellite phones, might be helpful.



While almost any contingency plan is better than no plan, a plan that has been tested in the real world, especially during rush hour or another time of heavy congestion or disruption, is better than a plan that only exists on paper. Practicing a plan will help you to identify problems and weaknesses that do not appear in a theoretical plan. Practice also helps ensure that all of those participating in the plan know exactly what they are required to do and where they should go.



Plans must be periodically checked and updated and the contents of fly-away kits inspected. Highway construction projects can render evacuation routes impassable, and flashlights with dead batteries are useless. It is also prudent to designate someone who will remain in the country and can safeguard your home and belongings and care for your pets after you leave.



Creating an evacuation plan is important because when many people are confronted by a dire emergency, they simply do not know what to do. When people are overwhelmed by an emergency, it is often difficult for them to think clearly and establish a logical plan. Having a plan in advance -- even an imperfect plan -- provides even a person in shock a framework to rely on and a path to follow.



The Syrian Example

Syria can help illustrate some aspects of evacuation planning. While many Western governments have closed their embassies and advised their citizens to leave the country, there are still many expatriates who remain in Syria. Others have even traveled to Syria, for personal or commercial reasons, since the outbreak of civil unrest.





.Some airlines, such as Air France, have suspended flights to Damascus, but others, including EgyptAir, Emirates Airlines and Royal Jordanian Airlines, continue flights. This could change. Late in the week of Aug. 26, Syrian rebels accused Russian arms smugglers of bringing weapons into Syria aboard civilian aircraft and threatened to attack such flights. While Stratfor has no information to confirm these rebel claims, Russian arms traffickers do indeed have a documented history of using civilian cargo and passenger planes to move weapons into conflict zones, and it is therefore possible that they are doing so in Syria. If the Syrian rebels begin to shoot at aircraft they suspect of smuggling weapons, airlines may become less willing to fly to Damascus.



The rebels have also intensified their attacks against the airport in Aleppo, which was being used to fly close air support missions and to bring supplies into the city. As a result, passenger flights to the airport have been suspended.



If foreign citizens cannot leave by air, the most secure land route from Damascus is Road 1, which leads directly to Beirut. An alternative route would take citizens south to Jordan via the M5 highway. However, this route traverses dangerous areas that are rife with fighting.



Expatriates in the eastern half of Syria would likely head to the Kurdish areas in the northeast through Road 7 and the M4 motorway, exiting through Turkey. There is a lot of fighting near the Iraqi border, and the road infrastructure in the southeast is not very good.



In the northern rebel-held areas, the best evacuation method is to simply take the most secure road straight to the Turkish border, avoiding regime shelling and airstrikes as much as possible. For foreigners on the coast, the best option is to leave by boat. An alternative route is to take the M1 motorway north to Turkey's Hatay province or south to northern Lebanon. Both of these borders are used heavily for smuggling supplies to the rebels, so one has to be careful of clashes.



Visit our Syria page for related analysis, videos, situation reports and maps.

One of the worst places to be stuck is in the centrally located Orontes Valley. Roads leading southwest to Lebanon and north to Turkey are largely blocked by the frontlines of the battle. Ideally, one would proceed west to the coast along such routes as Road 50 and hope not to be targeted while passing checkpoints or during ambushes.



Currently, the Syrian government and the rebels appear to be locked in a war of attrition and there are no signs of an imminent regime collapse. However, if the regime collapses suddenly, we can expect to see a flurry of activity as foreigners flee the conflict zones and governments work to evacuate the country.





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Print

160 55 635 138 Reprinting or republication of this report on websites is authorized by prominently displaying the following sentence, including the hyperlink to Stratfor, at the beginning or end of the report..



Read more: Evacuations and Contingency Planning
Stratfor

LIBERALS CAN’T BREAK 200-YEAR RACISM HABIT

A very interesting post from www.AnnCoulter.com about racism in America by liberals. This follows this post about Emmit Till in perspective.    This follows this post about some of the music that was poplular during 2011. This follows THIS POST about some movies that have been released over the past few years that you might have missed! This all follows this post about guidelines to chosing good movies to watch yourself!

LIBERALS CAN’T BREAK 200-YEAR RACISM HABIT



Democrats spent the first century of this country's existence refusing to treat black people like human beings, and the second refusing to treat them like adults.



After fighting the Civil War to continue enslaving black people and then subjecting newly freed black Americans to vicious, humiliating Jim Crow laws and Ku Klux Klan violence, Democrats set about frantically rewriting their own ugly history.



Step 1: Switch "Democrat" to "Southerner";



Step 2: Switch "Southerner" to "conservative Democrat";



Step 3: Switch "conservative Democrat" to "conservative."



Contrary to liberal folklore, the Democratic segregationists were not all Southern -- and they were certainly not conservative. They were dyed-in-the-wool liberal Democrats on all the litmus-test issues of their day.



All but one remained liberal Democrats until the day they died. That's the only one you've ever heard of: Strom Thurmond.



As soon as abortion is relegated to the same trash heap of history as slavery has been, liberals will be rewriting history to make Democrats the pro-lifers and Republicans the pro-choicers. That's precisely what they've done with the history of race in America.



In addition to lying in the history books, liberals lied on their personal resumes. Suddenly, every liberal remembered being beaten up by a 300-pound Southern sheriff during the civil rights movement.



Among the ones who have been caught falsely gassing about their civil rights heroism are Bob Beckel, Carl Bernstein and Joseph Ellis. (Some days, it seems as if there are more liberals pretending to have been Freedom Riders than pretending to be Cherokees!)



In the 1950s and '60s, Democrats were running segregationists for vice president, slapping Orval Faubus on the back and praising George Wallace voters for their "integrity." (That was Arthur Schlesinger Jr. in The New York Times.)





But the moment the real civil rights struggle was over, liberals decided to become black America's most self-important defenders.



Of course, once we got the Democrats to stop discriminating against blacks, there was no one else doing it. So liberals developed a rich fantasy life in which they played Atticus Finch and some poor white cop from Brooklyn would be designated Lester Maddox (racist Democrat, endorsed by Jimmy Carter).



White journalists who didn't know any actual black people (other than Grady the maid) became junior G-men searching for racists under every bed, requiring a steady stream of deeply pompous editorials.



You will never see anything so brave as a liberal fighting nonexistent enemies.



Liberals drove the entire country crazy with their endless battles against imaginary racists, to make up for their having been AWOL during the real fight over civil rights.



Throughout this period, every black-on-white crime became a re-enactment of "To Kill a Mockingbird"; every cop who shot a black perp was Bull Connor; and every alleged racist incident was instantly presumed true, no matter how preposterous.



When it turned out the hate crime was a hoax, the cop was being mugged and the black kid was guilty, the whole story would just quietly disappear from the news, as if the media were reading a bedtime story to a child, whispering the ending and tiptoeing out of the room.



Then came the O.J. verdict.



Millions of Americans watched as a mostly black jury acquitted an obviously guilty black celebrity and saw black America cheer the verdict. The sight of black law students whooping and applauding O.J.'s acquittal had the same emotional impact as watching Palestinians celebrate the 9/11 attack.



Overnight, the white guilt bank -- once thought "too big to fail" -- was shut down. Henceforth, instead of producing stuttering embarrassment, liberal moral intimidation on race produced only eye-rolling. With that, America became a much healthier country, especially for black people.



Without nonsense claims of racist "code words" to stop them, Republicans were finally able to implement long-sought reforms on crime and welfare. The unqualified success of Rudy Giuliani's crime policies in New York saved tens of thousands of black lives. Welfare reform was such a stunning success that Bill Clinton claimed credit for it.



Blacks had won the final civil rights battle: The right to be treated like adults. Even liberals ceased their oohing and ahhing over every little thing any black person did.



But the post-O.J. paradise came to a crashing halt with the appearance of Barack Obama.



Obama allowed liberals to return to accusing Americans of being racists and get the most liberal president America has ever seen at the same time.



The only firm evidence that there are any actual racists left in America is the fact that so many whites voted for Obama as some sort of racial penance.



More white people voted for Obama in 2008 than had voted for any Democratic presidential candidate in nearly 40 years.



They must have felt guilty about something. Not harboring any racist impulses, I was free to vote Republican.



Now that Obama is up for re-election, liberals are back to their old tricks. A nation with more child pornographers than racists -- a nation that's already elected a (half) black president once -- is suddenly said to be bristling with racists again!



My new book, out this week, "Mugged: Racial Demagoguery From the Seventies to Obama," reminds us that nothing good has ever come of Americans capitulating to liberals' racial bullying, especially not for black people. Never. Don't make the same mistake again, America.

MSM Buries Lead—American Majority Supports Arizona Law. But Our Elites Don’t Like The American Majority.

An interesting post from www.VDare.com about 1070 polling numbers. This follows this post about the immigration violation tip line ,this post about the MURDER of ROBERT KRENTZ, who the protestors and boycotters won't give a solution for, but will call Americans racist for trying to prevent another MURDER, and this post which shows that there are 30,000 openly illegal immigrants in the border town of El Paso across from the recent Juarez shooting. For more interesting stories like this click here to follow this blog.


MSM Buries Lead—American Majority Supports Arizona Law. But Our Elites Don’t Like The American Majority.
By Steve Sailer
The Arizona controversy has made clear just how embarrassingly the conventional wisdom-mongers have fallen for their own propaganda and really believe that Hispanics constitute an unstoppable electoral force.
For example, the Wall Street Journal headlined its story on its own poll on May 12:
"WSJ/NBC Poll: Hispanics Strongly Oppose Ariz. Immigration Law" by Susan Davis
Well, who wouldn’t be against the Arizona law after all the bad things we’ve heard—over and over—about it?
The WSJ story begins:
"By a two-to-one margin Hispanics are more strongly opposed than Americans overall to the recent immigration measure signed in to law in Arizona that would make it a state crime to reside there illegally.
“Seven in 10, 70%, of Hispanic respondents said they are somewhat or strongly opposed to the law, compared with 34% of all respondents in the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll set for release later today.
“Among Hispanics, 27% are somewhat or strongly supportive of Arizona’s law; that compares with 64% of respondents overall."
Read that again, carefully. The actual main news in the WSJ/NBC poll of 1,000 adults is buried: it’s that the overall American public supports the Arizona law by a 64-34 landslide. (Among those who hold a strong opinion on the subject, the ratio is a comparable 46-24.)
Similarly, a May 13 AP article by Alan Fram on AP-Univision polling began:
"Illegal immigrants are a boon, not a burden to the country, a resounding majority of Hispanics say, according to an Associated Press-Univision Poll that underscores sharp contrasts between the views of Hispanics and others. Most non-Hispanics say illegal immigrants are a drain on society.
“In addition, most Hispanics condemn Arizona's strict new law targeting undocumented immigrants, while only 20 percent of non-Hispanics oppose it."[AP-Univision Poll: Views on Arizona law divided along ethnic lines, May 13, 2010]
Huh? “Only 20% of non-Latinos oppose” the Arizona law? Isn’t that the real story?
In journalistic parlance, the MSM is burying the lead.
These kind of articles make sense only if, like many in the Main Stream Media, you assume that Hispanics’ votes are somehow more important than everybody’ else’s.
In reality, each vote (at least for now) counts the same.
And, on average Hispanics vote less often per capita. After all, many are in the country illegally (which doesn’t seem to be that esoteric an observation). And many who have legal residency don’t become citizens. And a large fraction of those who are citizens just don’t bother to vote.
Nor has there been overwhelming evidence that those Hispanics who do vote care all that much about illegal immigrants. A whopping 47% of them voted for Arizona’s Proposition 200 in 2004, for example, in the teeth of an earlier elite hysteria that included the then unborn-again John McCain.
But that hasn’t stopped the media, the Latino elites they interview, the Democrats, and a sizable fraction of GOP top dogs, from trying to reduce the controversy over illegal immigration into an ethnic struggle.
Simple arithmetic would seem to suggest that’s not a winning strategy. In the 2008 Presidential Election, according to the Census Bureau survey non-Hispanics cast 92.6 percent of the vote.
How did the conventional wisdom get so out of touch that these Arizona absurdities?
In modern America, Latinos often function as a sort of "stage army" for our elites. They want Hispanics to intimidate—by sheer bulk of numbers—the citizenry and make resistance to elite projects appear historically hopeless. The vast and seemingly always increasing quantities of Hispanics can be cited as justification for whatever a person in a position of influence wants to do.
Say you are the President of the United States and you are worried that what you consider your demographic bases—"young people, African-Americans, Latinos, and women"—won’t remember to show up to vote in 2010. So pick a fight over a state law and try to turn it into a racial conflict. Anybody who opposes you must be a racist, so you can’t lose, right?
Or say you want a make-work sinecure as an ethnic studies instructor or diversity coordinator. Harp on the existence of nearly 50,000,000 Latinos in the U.S... Claim to be one of their natural leaders. Assert that Real Soon Now they are all going to get around to voting—and that, when they do, they will all agree with you that you should have an easy job.
Say you are a high school administrator who doesn’t like the kind of students who wear American flag T-shirts to school. Well, punish them and blame it on the Latinos. Claim the Mexicans would riot if an American flag were seen on Cinco de Mayo—which is what has just happened at Live Oak High School in Morgan Hill, California.
I believe that this sort of elite enabling, not Reconquista, is the real political danger that the Mexodus poses to the U.S.
Having followed this issue closely for decades, I've come to the conclusion that there isn't much chance of Mexican elites in the U.S. organizing a powerful Quebec-style separatist movement.
There are two reasons: First, as Barack Obama decided in the 1980s after his lengthy consideration of Louis Farrakhan’s black economic nationalism, there’s no money in separatism. If Mexicans wanted to live in a separate country run by Mexicans, they would live in Mexico.
Second, Mexicans in the U.S. don't organize much of anything beyond the extended family or neighborhood level (such as a gang). LA Times columnist Gregory Rodriguez noted: "For example, in Los Angeles, home to more Mexicans than any other city in the U.S., there is not one ethnic Mexican hospital, college, cemetery or broad-based charity."[Mexican Americans Are Building No Walls, February 29, 2004]
On the other hand, the vast numbers of Mexicans in the U.S. due to legal and illegal immigration, the 1986 amnesty, and their high fertility serve the American left as a sort of mock mob, allowing American leftist elites to intimidate their rivals in all sorts of turf wars.
The American Left claims to have the vast Mexican masses on its side. They will (someday) vote in large numbers—so you'd better surrender now to them (or, to be precise, to their self-appointed leaders and allies).
Much of modern American leftism boils down to encouraging tribalistic attitudes among nonwhites. Clearly, some Mexican students in Morgan Hill’s Live Oak high school interpreted their school’s endorsement of multiculturalism through their own usual gang turf lens. Nor is it surprising that some American students, when exposed to these kind of school-sponsored Mexican assertions of cultural dominance, resist with subversive gestures, such as displaying American flags.
I have long argued that these racially fraught situations are used by upper middle class white liberals as class markers in order to put down their rivals of lower rank.
In California, for example, upper middle class white liberals almost never educate their children in high school classrooms with large numbers of Mexicans. It’s simply not done.
So if your kid goes to a school where Mexicans are dominant in numbers, and is therefore made uncomfortable by Mexican declarations of ascendancy, then that just shows to the white liberal mind that you and your kid are losers. Obviously, you can’t afford private school or to live in an expensive school district, or you aren’t smart enough to figure out how to manipulate the magnet and charter school rackets in order to get in with the right people.
It's a Perpetual Motion machine: if the elite-subsidized minority tribalism provokes the slightest sign of tribalistic reactions among the people who aren't allowed to express group pride—that is to say, Americans, citizens, whites, etc.—then that can be used to cram more expressions of elite-sponsored minority tribalism down the throats of the people who don't have their own approved tribe.
Wash, rinse, and repeat.
Let's review the common denominators between Morgan Hill’s Live Oak H.S., a very average school, and the recent brouhaha over race and IQ at Harvard Law School, a very exclusive school, where a student was denounced by Harvard LS dean Martha Minow, [Email her] because she had expressed open-mindedness about racial difference in IQ in a private email that was leaked by a romantic rival.
Note that the mere existence of diversity in a school encourages thought crimes about the causes of different average levels of achievement, which can then be denounced in the name of diversity, Martha Minow-style.
For example, in highly diverse public high schools in California, it usually becomes quickly apparent to students that average school performance typically follows a remarkably common hierarchy: Asians, then whites, then English-speaking Latinos, then blacks, and finally non-English speaking Latinos. At Live Oak, whites average 799 on California’s API scale, while Hispanics average 622.
It's very hard to remain oblivious to patterns this powerful.
Notice the elegance of the trap, however. If somebody without a privileged identity objects that the main reason their own fault—well, that's just proof of their “white racism”. And this shocking revelation of “white racism” therefore justifies even more quotas, disparate impact lawsuits, and elite-sponsored multiculti.
And if that encourages white Americans to start wondering whether they need to organize to protect their own rights in these ethnic conflicts, well, that's just more evidence that we need more quotas, etc.
Consequences inevitably flow from this structure of incentives. For example, Mexican and black students tend to develop an ethic of ethnic solidarity that says that the reason they don't do well on average is because they don't try hard to do well. And the reason they don't try hard, they believe, is because they know—as they've been told over and over—that the system is rigged against them by “white racism”.
Elites in the education system encourage this self-destructive mindset with their constant hypersensitivity about the slightest manifestation of white ethnocentrism, such as wearing American flag shirts.
Even mentioning the fact of the obvious achievement gaps is considered treading very close to the line of racism. Since the gaps are so pervasive and persistent, a simple Occam’s Razor explanation is always looming in everybody's minds. So there is much tension and hysteria as everybody tries to avoid letting slip that they have doubts that “white racism” is the only explanation.
Thus, the over-the-top denunciation of the Harvard law student who expressed in a private email the open-mindedness that so many Americans worry that they might accidentally let themselves reveal. By denouncing the crimethinker, they can demonstrate their loyalty to the reigning dogmas.
The other socially acceptable explanation for these gaps in average ethnic achievement is poverty and deprivation. Implication: it can be rectified by massive expenditures of (white) taxpayer dollars.
Doubts about whether more spending will work is evidence of “white racism”. So the cycle starts all over again.
The game is rigged for the Left, so the Left always wins.
At least when crimethinkers back down and apologize. This is the real significance of Morgan Hill. The American students and their parents in behaved in a tactically superior fashion to, say, Larry Summers or James D. Watson—or the Harvard law school student, who immediately crumpled when denounced by Minow.
Instead, The Morgan Hill Five followed the game plan devised by police officer James Crowley and the Cambridge PD last summer when insulted by President Obama: Never apologize. When the diversicrats like Minow and Obama schedule you for a Two Minutes Hate, do not back down. These incidents are a test of power and courage. Stand tall and make them give in.
When crimethinkers stand their ground, well, then the ground begins to shift under everybody's feet.
[Steve Sailer (email him) is movie critic for The American Conservative. His website www.iSteve.blogspot.com features his daily blog. His new book, AMERICA’S HALF-BLOOD PRINCE: BARACK OBAMA’S "STORY OF RACE AND INHERITANCE", is available here.]