Joy-Ann Reid Delivers Moving Speech At Divine 9 Council Of Presidents Town Hall
Joy-Ann Reid delivered an unforgettable keynote speech at a recent D9 Situation Room: Council of Presidents Town Hall, a private virtual event that united the leaders of all nine historically Black Greek-letter organizations.
According to AllHipHop, the political commentator and former host of MSNBC's The ReidOut—who is also a member of Delta Sigma Theta Inc.—spoke on how fake news can affect the Black community and how community leaders can combat that.
'We are living in an age of disinformation,' Reid cautioned attendees. 'It is so important that we look for trusted sources of information.' Mentioning her recently canceled show, she added, 'One of the reasons we did The ReidOut was to distill all of the noise and understand what is actually factual and true.' Reid also encouraged other D9 members to prioritize credible journalism over unverified social media content and called out established outlets like The New York Times, Reuters, BBC, and The Associated Press as trustworthy sources.
Reid also mentioned a recent viral story involving federal employees 'receiving a misleading mass email' requesting justification of their job performance. 'After investigation, we learned this email lacked proper authorization and was not legitimate,' she explained, emphasizing the importance of verifying information before reacting.
Organizers in attendance described the town hall as 'just the beginning' of mobilizing Black communities, distinguishing reliable information from disinformation, and sustaining grassroots.
'No one sorority or fraternity can do all this work alone,' one organization president affirmed during the panel discussion. 'Partner with another D9 organization in your community so that your voices and your work are amplified.'
With over 10,000 participants actively engaged in the live chat, the unity and determination among the Divine 9 was undeniable. 'There's a lot of excitement about next steps,' one person remarked. 'We are convening together to act together.'
As the event concluded, Divine 9 presidents reaffirmed their long-standing dedication to service, delivering a resounding message of commitment and legacy: 'We've been around for a long time. We're not new to this, but we are absolutely true to this.'
More from VIBE.com
Girls Trip: Sorority Sisters Pose For "Melanin Illustrated" Photoshoot
Delta Suspends 'Sorority Sisters' Co-Stars
Was It Worth It? Delta Sigma Theta Expelled Their 'Sorority Sisters' Stars
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘Bloodthirsty' Kristi Noem and Stephen Miller Want More Military on Streets
Stephen Miller and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem are two of the loudest voices in the room encouraging Donald Trump to militarize Los Angeles, a presidential aide has disclosed. Both urged the president to federalize and deploy California Army National Guard troops and send U.S. Marines to Los Angeles in response to protests against federal immigration raids, even though local officials opposed the move. 'Stephen has been clear in all the meetings: More military, faster,' a Trump adviser told Axios. Miller has called for using the military to crack down on protesters who try to block federal agents from making immigration arrests, even though federal troops are generally barred from domestic policing. He's been backed by Noem, who is 'practically bloodthirsty' in demanding tougher immigration enforcement, the adviser said. On Sunday, the homeland security secretary asked Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to instruct U.S. Marines to arrest rioters. A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security told Axios in a statement that Noem is 'antithetical to bloodthirsty—she is trying to prevent bloodshed.' The Daily Beast has reached out to the White House and DHS for comment. Trump took the extraordinary step over the weekend of deploying 4,000 National Guard troops and hundreds of U.S. Marines to Los Angeles in defiance of California Gov. Gavin Newsom's warnings that sending in federal troops would only make things worse. 'This brazen abuse of power by a sitting president inflamed a combustible situation, putting our people, our officers, and even our National Guard at risk,' Newsom said. The governor has sued to block the deployments. After five days of protests, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass enacted a partial curfew Tuesday night for downtown L.A. The reason, she said, was to 'stop bad actors who are taking advantage of the president's chaotic escalation.' Rioters have set off fireworks at officers, lit cars on fire, and thrown pieces of concrete at police, according to the Los Angeles Police Department. Video also shows the police using tear gas, flash-bangs, and non-lethal bullets to disperse crowds downtown. City officials, however, have said that the people peacefully protesting during the day are not the same ones who are clashing with police at night. Los Angeles Police Chief Jim McDonnell said Sunday that Trump had called in the National Guard troops prematurely. The president has long regretted not sending in the National Guard to quell the 2020 protests that broke out in major cities nationwide after the Minneapolis police killing of George Floyd, an unarmed Black man. At the time, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Mark A. Milley, convinced Trump not to invoke the Insurrection Act or deploy active-duty troops against the protesters. A federal law known as the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits using federal troops for domestic policing, except when expressly authorized by the Constitution or an act of Congress, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law. The main exception to the rule is the Insurrection Act, a compilation of statutes that allows the U.S. president to use the military to quash an armed rebellion or other insurrection, according to Lawfare. As of Wednesday, the president hadn't invoked the Insurrection Act, which limits the federal troops' mission to protecting federal property and personnel. According to Axios, that hasn't stopped Noem and Miller from calling for the military to do more, faster.
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'Deeply Negative Message': Relatives of Fort Gregg-Adams' Namesakes React to Trump Renaming
Relatives of the late Lt. Gen. Arthur Gregg and Lt. Col. Charity Adams-Earley anticipated it, but when President Donald Trump announced their parents' names would be stripped from the Virginia base, they were still surprised. Trump, in front of a crowd of Army soldiers Tuesday at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, said "for a little breaking news" that his administration would be removing the name Fort Gregg-Adams, which was bestowed on the base in 2023, and returning it to Fort Lee, originally named in honor of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee, who commanded troops of the slave-holding South during the Civil War. In a follow-up statement from the Army, it became clear that the base would not be explicitly named for the leader of the Confederate troops but instead for Pvt. Fitz Lee, a Buffalo soldier awarded the Medal of Honor for bravery in combat during the Spanish-American War. Read Next: Bragg Soldiers Who Cheered Trump's Political Attacks While in Uniform Were Checked for Allegiance, Appearance In all, the Trump administration is restoring the names of nine Army bases that shed Confederate namesakes in 2023 following an independent commission review directed by Congress. In each case, the administration found service members to use as namesakes who shared the names of the Confederate Civil War-era figures that were removed. The latest renaming was designed to sidestep the law passed by Congress ordering the removal of names honoring Confederates who fought to secede from the U.S. However, in Trump's speech at Fort Bragg, he specifically mentioned "Robert E. Lee." It was seen as a slight to the descendants of Gregg and Adams-Earley. Stanley Earley, the son of the soldier who served as the highest-ranking Black female officer in World War II, told that while he wasn't shocked at the change, he was "surprised" as well as "disappointed and upset" by the sudden announcement. "The naming of Fort Gregg-Adams sent a powerful positive message to the future," Earley told in an interview Wednesday. "Undoing it sends an even stronger, deeply negative message." Just two years ago, Fort Lee was renamed for Gregg -- the first Black brigadier general in the U.S. Army Quartermaster Corps and the first Black lieutenant general in the Army -- as well as Adams-Earley, who was the first Black officer in what would later become the Women's Army Corps prior to her death in 2002. It was a particularly powerful moment for Alicia Collier, Gregg's daughter. He was one of the first service members in recent history to have a base named after him while he was still alive. He died in August at the age of 96. "It's very disheartening," Collier told on Wednesday. "My father worked his entire life trying to move the Army and, as a result, the nation forward, and now we're watching it slip backwards." Collier and Earley both first spoke to in February, expressing worries that their parents' names could be removed from the Virginia base under Trump's Department of Defense. Both previously praised the intensive review process of the Naming Commission, which was created by Congress to make recommendations on base names and ultimately landed on their parents' histories to honor. Notably, neither said anything negative regarding Pvt. Lee, whose name will now adorn the Virginia base. The Spanish-American War hero was born just 25 miles away from the base in Dinwiddie County, Virginia, according to the Congressional Medal of Honor Society's database. "During a coastal assault in Cuba, Lee voluntarily disembarked under direct enemy fire to rescue wounded comrades from the battlefield," the Army's statement said. Ultimately, it's the legal technicalities that are concerning to the relatives of Gregg and Adams, as well as Trump's own admission during the speech that it was to honor "Robert E. Lee." "I think that the intent is that we're still honoring the original Robert E. Lee," Collier said. "It's a very interesting way to work around." Neither Collier nor Earley said they had been contacted by government or military officials prior to Tuesday's announcement by Trump. Earley said he was caught off guard, in part, because in late April, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson honored the 6888th Central Postal Directory Battalion, known as the Six Triple Eight commanded by Adams, with a Congressional Gold Medal. Johnson praised "the incomparable Lt. Col. Charity Adams-Earley who guided her unit" and commended her "unshakable grace and resolve," according to a copy of his remarks. In a few weeks, Earley was surprised that sentiment seemed to change. "They just had the Congressional Gold Medal session for the Six Triple Eight, and there were so many positive statements about the unit and my mother and what they did," Earley said. "It's a little bit surprising." The renaming of the bases is just the latest in a wide range of Trump administration actions removing historical ties. Earlier this month, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered the Navy to rename a ship that honored Harvey Milk, a gay rights icon, and other ship names are reportedly under review. Given the cultural shift by the administration, both of the descendants said it's not clear what the next steps forward would be. "There isn't really any recourse that's likely to be successful, so I guess we'll just have to move forward and hope that maybe, at the very least the original decision to rename, and that Charity Adams' and Arthur Gregg's names, will still be a part of our history and that we won't erase it," Collier said. Related: Their Relatives Were Black Heroes. They Fear the Military Won't Celebrate Their Stories Anymore.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Trump EPA moves to repeal climate rules that limit greenhouse gas emissions from US power plants
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday proposed repealing rules that limit planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions from power plants fueled by coal and natural gas, an action that Administrator Lee Zeldin said would remove billions of dollars in costs for industry and help 'unleash' American energy. The EPA also proposed weakening a regulation that requires power plants to reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic pollutants that can harm brain development of young children and contribute to heart attacks and other health problems in adults. The rollbacks are meant to fulfill Republican President Donald Trump's repeated pledge to 'unleash American energy' and make it more affordable for Americans to power their homes and operate businesses. If approved and made final, the plans would reverse efforts by Democratic President Joe Biden's administration to address climate change and improve conditions in areas heavily burdened by industrial pollution, mostly in low-income and majority Black or Hispanic communities. The power plant rules are among about 30 environmental regulations that Zeldin targeted in March when he announced what he called the 'most consequential day of deregulation in American history.' Zeldin said Wednesday the new rules would help end what he called the Biden and Obama administration's 'war on so much of our U.S. domestic energy supply.' 'The American public spoke loudly and clearly last November,' he added in a speech at EPA headquarters. 'They wanted to make sure that … no matter what agency anybody might be confirmed to lead, we are finding opportunities to pursue common-sense, pragmatic solutions that will help reduce the cost of living … create jobs and usher in a golden era of American prosperity.' Environmental and public health groups called the rollbacks dangerous and vowed to challenge the rules in court. Dr. Lisa Patel, a pediatrician and executive director of the Medical Society Consortium on Climate & Health, called the proposals 'yet another in a series of attacks' by the Trump administration on the nation's 'health, our children, our climate and the basic idea of clean air and water.' She called it 'unconscionable to think that our country would move backwards on something as common sense as protecting children from mercury and our planet from worsening hurricanes, wildfires, floods and poor air quality driven by climate change.' 'Ignoring the immense harm to public health from power plant pollution is a clear violation of the law,' added Manish Bapna, president and CEO of the Natural Resources Defense Council. 'If EPA finalizes a slapdash effort to repeal those rules, we'll see them in court.' The EPA-targeted rules could prevent an estimated 30,000 deaths and save $275 billion each year they are in effect, according to an Associated Press examination that included the agency's own prior assessments and a wide range of other research. It's by no means guaranteed that the rules will be entirely eliminated — they can't be changed without going through a federal rulemaking process that can take years and requires public comment and scientific justification. Even a partial dismantling of the rules would mean more pollutants such as smog, mercury and lead — and especially more tiny airborne particles that can lodge in lungs and cause health problems, the AP analysis found. It would also mean higher emissions of the greenhouse gases driving Earth's warming to deadlier levels. Biden, a Democrat, had made fighting climate change a hallmark of his presidency. Coal-fired power plants would be forced to capture smokestack emissions or shut down under a strict EPA rule issued last year. Then-EPA head Michael Regan said the power plant rules would reduce pollution and improve public health while supporting a reliable, long-term supply of electricity. The power sector is the nation's second-largest contributor to climate change, after transportation. In its proposed regulation, the Trump EPA argues that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from fossil fuel-fired power plants 'do not contribute significantly to dangerous pollution' or climate change and therefore do not meet a threshold under the Clean Air Act for regulatory action. Greenhouse gas emissions from coal and gas-fired plants 'are a small and decreasing part of global emissions,' the EPA said, adding: 'this Administration's priority is to promote the public health or welfare through energy dominance and independence secured by using fossil fuels to generate power.' The Clean Air Act allows the EPA to limit emissions from power plants and other industrial sources if those emissions significantly contribute to air pollution that endangers public health. If fossil fuel plants no longer meet the EPA's threshold, the Trump administration may later argue that other pollutants from other industrial sectors don't either and therefore shouldn't be regulated, said Meghan Greenfield, a former EPA and Justice Department lawyer now in private practice. The EPA proposal 'has the potential to have much, much broader implications,' she said. Zeldin, a former New York congressman, said the Biden-era rules were designed to 'suffocate our economy in order to protect the environment,' with the intent to regulate the coal industry 'out of existence' and make it 'disappear.' National Mining Association president and CEO Rich Nolan applauded the new rules, saying they remove 'deliberately unattainable standards' for clean air while 'leveling the playing field for reliable power sources, instead of stacking the deck against them.' But Dr. Howard Frumkin, a former director of the National Center for Environmental Health and professor emeritus at the University of Washington School of Public Health, said Zeldin and Trump were trying to deny reality. 'The world is round, the sun rises in the east, coal-and gas-fired power plants contribute significantly to climate change, and climate change increases the risk of heat waves, catastrophic storms and many other health threats,' Frumkin said. 'These are indisputable facts. If you torpedo regulations on power plant greenhouse gas emissions, you torpedo the health and well-being of the American public and contribute to leaving a world of risk and suffering to our children and grandchildren.' A paper published earlier this year in the journal Science found the Biden-era rules could reduce U.S. power sector carbon emissions by 73% to 86% below 2005 levels by 2040, compared with a reduction of 60% to 83% without the rules. 'Carbon emissions in the power sector drop at a faster rate with the (Biden-era) rules in place than without them,' said Aaron Bergman, a fellow at Resources for the Future, a nonprofit research institution and a co-author of the Science paper. The Biden rule also would result in 'significant reductions in sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides, pollutants that harm human health,' he said.
