Sunday, February 25, 2007

Malcolm X on Zionism---Reprinted From the Egyptian Gazette

Zionist Logic -- Malcolm X on Zionism

Malcolm X (Omowale Malcolm X Shabazz)

Taken from The Egyptian Gazette -- Sept. 17, 1964

The Zionist armies that now occupy Palestine claim their ancient Jewish prophets predicted that in the "last days of this world" their own God would raise them up a "messiah" who would lead them to their promised land, and they would set up their own "divine" government in this newly-gained land, this "divine" government would enable them to "rule all other nations with a rod of iron."

If the Israeli Zionists believe their present occupation of Arab Palestine is the fulfillment of predictions made by their Jewish prophets, then they also religiously believe that Israel must fulfill its "divine" mission to rule all other nations with a rod of irons, which only means a different form of iron-like rule, more firmly entrenched even, than that of the former European Colonial Powers.

These Israeli Zionists religiously believe their Jewish God has chosen them to replace the outdated European colonialism with a new form of colonialism, so well disguised that it will enable them to deceive the African masses into submitting willingly to their "divine" authority and guidance, without the African masses being aware that they are still colonized.


The Israeli Zionists are convinced they have successfully camouflaged their new kind of colonialism. Their colonialism appears to be more "benevolent," more "philanthropic," a system with which they rule simply by getting their potential victims to accept their friendly offers of economic "aid," and other tempting gifts, that they dangle in front of the newly-independent African nations, whose economies are experiencing great difficulties. During the 19th century, when the masses here in Africa were largely illiterate it was easy for European imperialists to rule them with "force and fear," but in this present era of enlightenment the African masses are awakening, and it is impossible to hold them in check now with the antiquated methods of the 19th century.

The imperialists, therefore, have been compelled to devise new methods. Since they can no longer force or frighten the masses into submission, they must devise modern methods that will enable them to manouevre the African masses into willing submission.

The modern 20th century weapon of neo-imperialism is "dollarism." The Zionists have mastered the science of dollarism: the ability to come posing as a friend and benefactor, bearing gifts and all other forms of economic aid and offers of technical assistance. Thus, the power and influence of Zionist Israel in many of the newly
"independent" African nations has fast-become even more unshakeable than that of the 18th century European colonialists... and this new kind of Zionist colonialism differs only in form and method, but never in motive or objective.

At the close of the 19th century when European imperialists wisely foresaw that the awakening masses of Africa would not submit to their old method of ruling through force and fears, these ever-scheming imperialists had to create a "new weapon," and to find a "new base" for that weapon.


The number one weapon of 20th century imperialism is zionist dollarism, and one of the main bases for this weapon is Zionist Israel. The ever-scheming European imperialists wisely placed Israel where she could geographically divide the Arab world, infiltrate and sow the seed of dissension among African leaders and also divide the Africans against the Asians.

Zionist Israel's occupation of Arab Palestine has forced the Arab world to waste billions of precious dollars on armaments, making it impossible for these newly independent Arab nations to concentrate on strengthening the economies of their countries and elevate the living standard of their people.

And the continued low standard of living in the Arab world has been skillfully used by the Zionist propagandists to make it appear to the Africans that the Arab leaders are not intellectually or technically qualified to lift the living standard of their people ... thus, indirectly "enducing" Africans to turn away from the Arabs and towards the Israelis for teachers and technical assistance.

"They cripple the bird's wing, and then condemn it for not flying as fast as they."

The imperialists always make themselves look good, but it is only because they are competing against economically crippled newly independent countries whose economies are actually crippled by the Zionist-capitalist conspiracy. They can't stand against fair competition, thus they dread Gamal Abdul Nasser's call for African-Arab Unity under Socialism.


If the "religious" claim of the Zionists is true that they were to be led to the promised land by their messiah, and Israel's present occupation of Arab Palestine is the fulfillment of that prophesy: where is their messiah whom their prophets said would get the credit for leading them there? It was Ralph Bunche who "negotiated" the Zionists into possession of Occupied Palestine! Is Ralph Bunche the messiah of Zionism? If Ralph Bunche is not their messiah, and their messsiah has not yet come, then what are they doing in Palestine ahead of their messiah?

Did the Zionists have the legal or moral right to invade Arab Palestine, uproot its Arab citizens from their homes and seize all Arab property for themselves just based on the "religious" claim that their forefathers lived there thousands of years ago? Only a thousand years ago the Moors lived in Spain. Would this give the Moors of today the legal and moral right to invade the Iberian Peninsula, drive out its Spanish citizens, and then set up a new Moroccan nation ... where Spain used to be, as the European zionists have done to our Arab brothers and sisters in Palestine?...

In short the Zionist argument to justify Israel's present occupation of Arab Palestine has no intelligent or legal basis in history ... not even in their own religion. Where is their Messiah?

Cut Off All War Funds' Day--Detroit Public Meeting Chaired by PANW Editor

Cut Off All War Funds' Day

By Eric Campbell
Michigan Citizen
February 25th-March 3rd, 2007 Issue

On Feb. 17, on the second floor of the Central United Methodist Church, a crowd of over a hundred committed activists engaged in a passionate dialogue meant to keep the fire lit under the quest for peace.

The event was a nationwide effort with similar town hall meetings in New York, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, Boston, Atlanta and many other major cities across the U.S.

Under the banner 'Cut Off All War Funds Day', the meeting was called to emphasize the costs and misappropriation of tax dollars in waging a war in Iraq and the Middle East.

Speakers, including U.S. Representative John Conyers, Michigan State Senator Martha Scott and Detroit City Councilwoman JoAnn Watson, connected the national war funding with the poor local economy. Speakers said resources are diverted from health care, public education, affordable housing, job-loss assistance programs and funneled directly into military action overseas.

Abayomi Azikiwe, co-founder of the Michigan Emergency Committee Against War and Injustice, said everyone whether they acknowledge it or not are "involved" in the war.

"They're losing their jobs, they're having utilities shut off, their salaries are decreasing, they're already involved," said Azikiwe. "People went out on November 7th and voted overwhelmingly in opposition to the war. So it's just a question of getting the government to respond affirmatively."

Literature at the event describes the numbers the U.S. has committed to its military campaign.

Analysts have estimated that the Iraq war has cost the state of Michigan $9.5 billion and the city of Detroit $600 million.

These numbers were compared with local struggles such as the $19 million dollar budget hole that the Detroit School Board is trying to fix by closing 52 schools.

According to the Institute for Policy Studies, the U.S. has spent a total of $321 billion in Iraq as of Sept. 2006 with an estimated long-term bill of $1.3 trillion.

After an introductory welcome by Azikiwe, Councilwoman Watson offered a plan from which to mount a campaign to stop the military effort in Iraq.

"There's war going on all around the globe, with American money, American troops, America's military power--but Americans of conscience, of all backgrounds must stand together as one. Not based on philosophical roots, and one group or another group--the truth is we're one family," said Watson, "And as one family, it's good for us to take this stand today."

Congressman John Conyers, who has been vocal in the effort to cut off funds for the war, said he believes the war abroad affects domestic issues at home. Conyers also spoke at the national peace demonstration in Washington, D.C. Jan. 27th.

"It's been made clear here that we're connected," said Conyers. "The suffering here in Michigan is being caused by the wars that this administration is pursuing."

He added a historical perspective on the issues explaining: "This is the only war in American history in which taxes for the wealthy did not go up, but went down. This is the only war in which we haven't had a draft. Remember that in Vietnam it was when they utilized the draft that millions of parents joined their children in closing down that war. And that's what we have to do this time."

Conyers was clear about his support for the public funding of campaigns for public office and universal health care.

He also expressed his disdain for a recent announcement in Congress that the U.S. military plans to set up a permanent base on the continent of Africa.

"We don't need anymore military installations in Africa and in Iraq, in South America or anywhere," said Conyers. "We have a department of war--the department of defense was called the department of war when they were just naming things for what they were--but the need now is for a department of peace."

Conyers said the Democrats are committed to stemming the tide of military escalation being pursued by the Bush administration.

Conyers is a co-sponsor, along with Rep. Maxine Waters (CA-35), Rep. Lynne Woolsey (CA-6), Rep. Barbara Lee (CA-9) and others, of H.R. 508 which would conclude the United States' involvement in Iraq within six months of the enactment of the legislation.

The representatives hope to focus the White House and its allies on the domestic repercussions of war, as well as the damage inflicted overseas.

The 'Cut Off All War Funds' is part of a continuing political action series that began last November.

Abayomi Azikiwe from MECAWI said, "There were 500,000 (demonstrators) on Jan. 27th, the crowd will probably be larger on March 17th. We are mobilizing buses...There's no question about it--the anti-war sentiment in this country is overwhelming."

The Michigan Emergency Committee Against War and Injustice is leading the drive to organize the trip to Washington as part of a worldwide protest March 17, 2007 on the fourth anniversary of the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq. For details call (313) 680-5508 or visit

H.R. 508 Calls For The:

-Repeal of the authorization of the use of force against Iraq that was passed by Congress in 2002.

-Require the complete withdrawal of U.S. troops and contractors within six months of the enactment of this bill.

-Turn security activities and military operations in Iraq over to the elected Iraqi government within six months of the date of enactment.

-Prohibit the U.S. from establishing permanent bases in Iraq.

-Accelerate the training and equipping of Iraqi military and security forces.

-Pursue security and stability in Iraq through diplomacy.

-Provide assistance to the Iraqi government in recovering archeological, cultural and historic artifacts that have been lost since the U.S. invasion.

-And fully fund veterans health care.

Saturday, February 24, 2007

US Government Says It Will Reopen Civil Rights Era Martyr's Cases: Biography of Mrs. Viola Liuzzo

FBI May Reopen Civil Rights Era Cold Cases


JACKSON, Mississippi (Feb. 23) - The FBI is considering reopening dozens of cold cases involving slayings suspected of being racially motivated in the South during the 1950s and '60s.

An announcement could come as early as Tuesday, according to a law enforcement official who spoke with the Associated Press on condition of anonymity because the plans have not yet been finalized.

In addition to the FBI's own investigations, the Southern Poverty Law Center submitted its own list last week of 74 potential unsolved slayings that involved white-on-black violence.

Thirty-two of the deaths happened in Mississippi. The others were in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Tennessee, Louisiana, North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida, Kentucky and New York.

Mark Potok, director of the Intelligence Project for the Alabama-based Southern Poverty Law Center, said each case was researched in the late 1980s when the group was putting together a civil rights memorial. But it is unclear if each could be considered a civil rights case, he said.

"The truth is we don't know," said Potok, whose group investigates hate crimes. "In each case there was some evidence to suggest that these were racial murders, but it absolutely was not proven. Had we been able to nail them down, their names would've been literally chiseled into the civil rights memorial that sits outside our building here."

U.S. Attorney Dunn Lampton in Jackson reviewed the list of Mississippi killings for the Associated Press on Friday and said based on the limited amount of information available that none would qualify for federal prosecution under civil rights statutes. But he said many could still be prosecuted on a local or state level as murders.

The deaths outlined by the center happened in a variety of ways, from police-involved shootings to trysts with white women broken up by gunfire.

In most cases, the statute of limitations under federal civil rights laws will have run out, Lampton said. In others, charges could not be brought because the accused already have faced charges and been cleared by a jury.

FBI Director Robert Mueller said the bureau was aggressively seeking to solve cold civil rights cases, vowing to "pursue justice to the end, and we will, no matter how long it takes, until every living suspect is called to answer for their crimes."

Most recently federal prosecutors brought kidnapping and conspiracy charges against James Ford Seale, 71, who allegedly participated in the 1964 kidnappings and murders of Charles Eddie Moore and Henry Hezekiah Dee in southwest Mississippi.

Seale was arrested Jan. 24 after the U.S. Justice Department reopened its investigation and learned that he was still alive. He has pleaded not guilty and is due for trial in April. The case qualified for federal prosecution because the captors allegedly took Moore and Dee across the state line into Louisiana while they were still alive.

In 1994, Mississippi won the conviction of Byron de la Beckwith for the 1963 sniper killing of NAACP leader Medgar Evers.

In Alabama, Bobby Frank Cherry was convicted in 2002 of killing four black girls in the bombing of a Birmingham church in 1963. In 2001, Thomas Blanton was convicted.

Edgar Ray Killen, an 80-year-old former Ku Klux Klansman, was convicted last June of manslaughter in the killings of three civil rights workers in Mississippi in 1964.

Lara Jakes Jordan in Washington, D.C., contributed to this report.


Biography of Mrs. Viola Liuzzo

Viola Fauver Gregg Liuzzo (April 11, 1925-March 25, 1965), a Unitarian Universalist committed to work for education and economic justice, gave her life for the cause of civil rights. The 39-year-old mother of five was murdered by white supremacists after her participation in the protest march from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama.

Viola was born on April 11, 1925, in California, Pennsylvania. Her father, Heber Ernest Gregg, of Scottish, Irish and Native American descent, was once a mineworker, but lost his job when he lost his hand in an accident. Her mother, Eva Wilson Gregg, of German and English descent, was a teacher. The family, moving several times, lived in Tennessee and Georgia and perhaps other parts of the South. Viola grew up in poverty and in the midst of racial segregation, discrimination and hatred. At age six, when her mother was manager of a small Georgia grocery store, Viola took money from the cash register and gave it to a black child whose family was even poorer than her own.

During the early months of World War II, Heber Gregg moved his family to Ypsilanti, Michigan so that he could work at a bomber factory. Shortly afterward, inspired by posters depicting Rosie the Riveter, Viola moved to Detroit to look for war work. At work in a cafeteria, she met George Argyris whom she married in early 1943. (She had been married once before—for only a day—at age 16.) A week after the wedding, she met Sarah Evans, an African American woman who became her closest friend. The two had much in common, including childhood in the South. Viola gave birth to two daughters, Penny and Evangeline Mary, in 1946 and 1947. Evans cared for the children while Viola worked as a waitress.

In 1949 George and Viola divorced. Two years later she married Anthony James Liuzzo, a union organizer for the Teamsters. They had three children: Tommy, born in 1951, Anthony, Jr. in 1955, and Sally in 1958. Jim legally adopted Penny and Mary, children of Viola's previous marriage, in 1956. Evans worked as the Liuzzo family's full-time nanny and housekeeper.

At age 35 Liuzzo, a high school dropout, trained for a career as a medical laboratory assistant at the Carnegie Institute of Detroit, 1961-62. In 1963, to further enhance her education, she enrolled in classes at Wayne State University.

Liuzzo was also active in local efforts on behalf of reform in education and economic justice. Twice she was arrested, pleaded guilty, and insisted on a trial to publicize the causes for which she was an advocate. Evans said of her friend, "Viola Liuzzo lived a life that combined the care of her family and her home with a concern for the world around her. This involvement with her times was not always understood by her friends; nor was it appreciated by those around her."

In 1964 Liuzzo began attending the First Unitarian Universalist Church of Detroit, two blocks from the Wayne State campus, and, through Evans, became active in the Detroit chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). That same year Evans and Liuzzo drove to New York City to attend a United Nations Seminar on civil rights sponsored by the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA).

Liuzzo's spiritual journey included putting hands to work. Unchurched as a child, she had converted to Roman Catholicism when she married Jim. Drawn to Roman Catholic mysticism for a time, she was later interested in Protestant evangelicalism. She sought personal relationship with a God active in the events of human history and herself wanted to make a difference in the world. At First Unitarian Universalist Liuzzo found a faith matching both her ideas and her longing to be of service. She became a full member on March 29, 1964. Many members of the church had been Freedom Riders. Daughter Penny attended the young adult group's discussions.

In late February, 1965, Jimmy Lee Jackson, a young African-American, was fatally wounded by police following a voter rights demonstration in Marion, Alabama. In response the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. organized a march of protest from Selma to the State capitol in Montgomery. On March 7, "Bloody Sunday," 500 peaceful and prayerful marchers were attacked and dispersed by Alabama State Troopers with billyclubs and gas grenades. King then called for any and all persons to come to Selma. His telegram to clergy all across the United States, and subsequent events, brought one hundred Unitarian Universalist ministers to Selma. Among the earliest to arrive was Rev. James Reeb, who was attacked on the street by a group of whites on March 9 and died two days later.

Liuzzo, with millions of other Americans, had seen on television the horror happening in the South. On March 8 she decided to go to Selma. Shortly afterward, she attended a memorial at First Unitarian Universalist for the Rev. Reeb. On March 16, after participating with daughter Penny and 250 Wayne students in a Selma sympathy march, Liuzzo called her husband and told him there were "too many people who just stand around talking," that she had to help, and that she was going to Selma for a week. She asked Evans to explain to her children where their mother had gone and to tell them she would call home every night. Evans warned that she could be killed. Liuzzo replied simply, "I want to be part of it."

The drive to Selma took three days. Liuzzo presented herself at the Roy Brown African Methodist Episcopal Church, "Brown Chapel," and volunteered to work with the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC). She was asked to serve at the hospitality desk, welcoming and registering other volunteers. On Sunday, March 21, she joined 3,000 other marchers as, five abreast, they marched across the Pettus Bridge, the site of Bloody Sunday, and began the trek towards Montgomery. On Monday and Tuesday she continued her work at Brown Chapel's registration desk and also made shuttle runs from the airport to the marchers' campsite. Afterward she served at the campsite's first-aid station.

On March 24 Liuzzo stayed overnight at St. Jude's, a complex of buildings including a Catholic Church, hospital and school, just inside the Montgomery city limits. From the church tower she watched the approach of 25,000 marchers. When she came down from the tower, unsettled and anxious, she told Timothy Deasy, one of the parish priests, "Father, I have a feeling of apprehension. Something is going to happen today. Someone is going to be killed."

Calmer after prayer, she joined the marchers, barefoot, for the last four miles to the capitol building in Montgomery. With everyone else she sang freedom songs and listened to the speeches. When the march was over, Liuzzo met civil rights worker Leroy Moton, who had been using her car all day as an airport shuttle. The two of them drove five passengers back to Selma. When they were dropped off, Viola volunteered to return Moton to Montgomery.

Viola's biographer, Mary Stanton, describes the ride to Selma. "Between the airport and Selma a car full of whites drove up behind them and banged into the bumper of the Oldsmobile several times before passing . . . When they stopped for gas, Moton remembered, white bystanders shouted insults at the integrated group. Further along, the driver of another car turned on his high beams and left them shining into Vi's rearview mirror. 'Two can play at that game,' she said and deliberately slowed up, making the offending car pass her. Finally, when another car pulled up alongside the Oldsmobile while one in front slowed down, Vi had to jam on her brakes. They were boxed in, one of the passengers remembers, but Mrs. Liuzzo seemed to be more annoyed than afraid. As they drove along Highway 80, Vi began singing freedom songs: 'And long before I'll be a slave I'll be buried in my grave and go home to my Lord and be free.'"

Gary Thomas Rowe was a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) informant and a member of the Klux Klan (KKK). According to his court testimony, events transpired as follows. After the passengers were delivered, he and three other members of a KKK "missionary squad"—Collie Leroy Wilkins, Jr., William Orville Eaton, and Eugene Thomas—spotted Liuzzo and Moton stopped at a traffic light in Selma. They followed her car for twenty miles. While she attempted to outrun her pursuers, she sang at the top of her lungs, "We Shall Overcome." About half way between Selma and Montgomery the four men pulled their car up next to hers and shot at her. Liuzzo was killed instantly. Her car rolled into a ditch. Moton escaped injury.

Jim Liuzzo learned of his wife's death at midnight. The following day President Lyndon Johnson called Jim to say, "I don't think she died in vain because this is going to be a battle, all out as far as I'm concerned." Jim told the President, "My wife died for a sacred battle, the rights of humanity. She had one concern and only one in mind. She took a quote from Abraham Lincoln that all men are created equal and that's the way she believed."

On March 27 a group of about 200 protesters, black and white, led by the Rev. James Orange of the SCLC marched to the Dallas County courthouse in Selma. The Rev. James Bevel told them, "[Viola Liuzzo] gave her life that freedom might be saved throughout this land." On March 28, at San Francisco's Grace Episcopal Cathedral, Martin Luther King said of Liuzzo, "If physical death is the price some must pay to save us and our white brothers from eternal death of the spirit, then no sacrifice could be more redemptive."

UUA Selma Memorial Plaque

On March 29 the NAACP sponsored a memorial service for Liuzzo at the People's Community Church in Detroit. Fifteen hundred people attended, among them, Rosa Parks. On March 30 at the Immaculate Heart of Mary Roman Catholic Church in Detroit a high requiem mass was celebrated for Liuzzo. Dr. King was among the 750 people attending the televised service. Some Catholics protested the mass, citing Liuzzo's divorce. Father Deasy said. "I felt very strongly about this woman and her goodness. She inspired us all. Her energy, enthusiasm and compassion were contagious and put many of us to shame."

On April 5 the Wayne Friends of SNCC sponsored a memorial service for Liuzzo in the Community Arts Auditorium at Wayne State University.

After these tributes, attempts were made to discredit Liuzzo. Entirely false rumors spread that she was a member of the Communist party and that she had traveled to Selma to have sexual relations with men in the Civil Rights movement. No one of the four KKK members was convicted of murder. Rowe testified for the prosecution and thus received immunity. The other three were eventually given ten-year sentences, under federal law, for violation of Liuzzo's civil rights. From 1979-83 the Liuzzo children tried through legal action, unsuccessfully, to get the FBI to acknowledge complicity in the death of their mother.

In 2002, nearly forty years after their deaths, a Selma Memorial plaque, honoring Jimmy Lee Jackson, James Reeb and Viola Liuzzo, was dedicated at the UUA's Boston headquarters building at 25 Beacon Street.

The biography of Liuzzo is Mary Stanton, From Selma to Sorrow: The Life and Death of Viola Liuzzo (1998). Her story is also told in Jack Mendelsohn, The Martyrs: 16 Who Gave Their Lives for Racial Justice (1966); Jan Gardner, "They Died for Freedom," The World: The Journal of the Unitarian Universalist Association (March/April 1996); Unitarian Universalist Association, "Biographies of Some UUs Who Worked for Racial Justice: Viola Gregg Liuzzo," Journey Toward Wholeness Sunday Handbook (2001); Richard D. Leonard, Call to Selma (2002); and Kim K. Crawford Harvie, "Call to Selma," sermon presented at Arlington Street Church, Boston, Massachusetts (March 17, 2002). See also Kay Houston, "The Detroit Housewife Who Moved a Nation Toward Racial Justice," Detroit News (

Article by Joanne Giannino


Little Rock No Longer on Desegration Watch: Biography of Mrs. Daisy L. Bates

Updated:2007-02-24 09:48:48

Little Rock No Longer on Desegregation Watch


LITTLE ROCK (Feb. 23) - A judge in one of the nation's longest-running school desegregation cases released the Little Rock district from federal supervision Friday, nearly 50 years after President Eisenhower sent in troops to escort nine black students into all-white Central High.

U.S. District Judge William R. Wilson Jr. said the district is substantially complying with a 1998 desegregation plan worked out in the 27,000-student district.

With blacks gaining a majority on the school board last September, the judge said he felt comfortable ending supervision and confident that the district would keep working to improve academic achievements among its 19,000 black students.

In 1957, despite a U.S. Supreme Court order, Gov. Orval Faubus tried to thwart black students from enrolling at Central High, setting off one of the biggest crises of the civil rights era. Eisenhower sent in the 101st Airborne to enforce the order.

"The district has been given back to the people of this community, and my pledge to them is to continue to work hard and recognize that we're all going to have to work hard," said Superintendent Roy Brooks, who is black. "I think that this is a clear indication that 1957 is not 2007."

A final sticking point, which stemmed from a 1982 lawsuit, had been whether the district was adequately measuring black students' test scores to determine whether they were improving. Late last year, the district adopted a resolution that said it would continue to assess the progress of black students even if the district was not under court supervision.

In Little Rock, as is the case nationwide, black students on average score below their white classmates on standardized tests. The gap in Little Rock is as large as 40 points on both state and national standardized tests. There has been some improvement over the years, but many argue there hasn't been enough.

"We're certainly disappointed in view of the lack of progress this district has made in addressing the needs of African-American students," said John Walker, a lawyer for Joshua Intervenors, which represents black students. "The standard was not high for the district to meet, but they certainly have not met it. We will have to pursue other means."

School board member Baker Kurrus, who is white, called Wilson's decision "a well-deserved endorsement."

"We have to prove that we're capable of managing our district and make sure that the mistakes of the past are never repeated," Kurrus said. "We simply must reach all students in our district."


Daisy Bates
Also known as: Daisy Lee Bates, Daisy Lee Gatson Bates, Mrs. Daisy Bates
(c. 1914 - 1999)

Civil Rights Activist, Publisher

Biographical Essay

Daisy Bates is best known for her involvement in the struggle to integrate Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas. As an advisor to nine black students trying to attend a previously all-white school, she was a pivotal figure in that seminal moment of the civil rights movement. As a publisher and journalist, she was also a witness and advocate on a larger scale. Her memoir of the conflict, The Long Shadow of Little Rock, is a primary text in the history of American race relations. Bates endured numerous hardships, but in the ensuing years her unstinting labors on behalf of equality opportunity have earned her numerous laurels.

She was born Daisy Lee Gatson in Huttig, a tiny Arkansas town dominated by a sawmill. "Huttig might have been called a sawmill plantation," she maintained in her book, "for everyone worked for the mill, lived in houses owned by the mill, and traded at the general store run by the mill." Growing up there, "I knew I was a Negro, but I did not really understand what that meant until I was seven years old." At that time, she went to buy some meat for her mother at a store and was rudely snubbed by the butcher. "Niggers have to wait 'til I wait on the white people," he brusquely informed her.

The incident had a strong impact on young Daisy, but her rage at discrimination turned to horror when she learned, somewhat later, that the parents she had known all her life were in reality friends of her real parents; her mother, it turned out, had been murdered while resisting rape by three white men. The men were never brought to justice, and Daisy's real father left town. "Young as I was, strange as it may seem," she wrote, "my life now had a secret goal to find the men who had done this horrible thing to my mother. So happy once, now I was like a little sapling which, after a violent storm, puts out only gnarled and twisted branches."

At the age of 15, Daisy became the object of an older man's attentions. L. C. Bates, an insurance salesman who had also worked on newspapers in the South and West. L. C. wooed her for several years, and they married in 1942, setting up housekeeping in Little Rock. Though the low pay and lack of job security had been a constant for him as a journalist, he longed to leave the insurance business and run his own newspaper. The Bateses decided to act on this dream, leasing a printing plant that belonged to a church publication and inaugurating the Arkansas State Press. The first issue appeared on May 9, 1941.

The paper became an avid voice for civil rights even before a nationally recognized movement had emerged, and enjoyed a substantial readershipand thus a healthy flow of advertising revenue. The paper regularly published articles that reported and condemned police brutality against black citizens, and took up the cause of black veterans of World War II, who met with harassment and violencesometimes even murderupon returning to the South. Yet the paper's fearless editorializing on the subject of a black serviceman's slaying at the hands of a white police officer upset local whites, especially area business owners. Faced with a sudden loss of advertising money, the paper appeared poised to disappear. "The picture was discouraging," Daisy recalled in her memoir. "So much so that I was tempted to pack up and leave Little Rock." Even so, she and her husband "decided to stick to our guns."

The State Press continued to publish pieces attacking police brutality. "The Negroes supposedly fighting a war in the name of freedom had through our paper found a voice to express their feelings," she asserted. Henceforth, emboldened by the support of readers and bolder advertisers, the paper "expanded its crusading role on an ever widening front. It fought to free negroes from muddy, filthy streets, slum housing, menial jobs, and injustice in the courtrooms." Thanks in part to such crusading, conditions in Little Rock improved for a time, and it "actually began to gain a reputation as a liberal southern city." In 1945, the State Press was able to buy new printing equipment.

Daisy attended classes at nearby Shorter College in business administration, public relations, and "other subjects related to the newspaper field." She also studied for a time at Philander Smith College. Though she loved flying and took classes at a flight school, Daisy was forced to give up this hobby when it adversely affected her insurance premiums. She served as the paper's editor- in-chief during L. C.'s vacation, and both before and after his return continued to pursue controversial stories. A 1946 piece about a labor dispute, which sided with striking workers and criticized a local judge, led to their arrest and conviction on contempt of court. The Arkansas Supreme Court overturned the conviction.

After the war, throngs of black soldiers returned to the South, facing discrimination, harassment, and violence. Bates noted in her book that brutality against returning soldiers was a great motivator in the growth of the civil rights movement, and that membership in the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) grew radically during this period. L. C. and Daisy Bates had been members virtually since their arrival in Little Rock; in 1952, Daisy became the leader of the state conference of NAACP branches. She was already co-chairing the state conference's Committee on Fair Employment Practices, but took to her new duties with aplomb. Two years later, in a landmark decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled school segregation unconstitutional; the decision was sparked by a multitude of lawsuits filed against segregated schools and coordinated by the NAACP.

"To the nation's Negroes," Daisy Bates observed in her book, "the Supreme Court decision meant that the time for delay, evasion, or procrastination was over." While acting governor Francis A. Cherry expressed his intention to comply with the law, he was defeated by an avid segregationistOrval Faubus, who vowed resistance to federal mandates on the issue. But Daisy Bates and other activists, who had long watched black studies languish in inferior schools while all-white schools enjoyed infinitely greater resources, determined to press the issue. Nine black students were slated to attend Little Rock's Central High; they became the focal point for one of the most intense chapters of the civil rights movement.

Despite all legislative efforts by the segregationists to prevent the "Little Rock Nine," as the students were known, from attending Central High, the school's integration was slated to begin in the fall of 1957. Daisy Bates became their advisor and protector. White mobs met at the school, threatening to kill the black students; these mobs harassed not only activists but also northern journalists who came to cover the story. Soon, Bates recollected, "hysteria in all of its madness enveloped the city. Racial feelings were at a fever pitch."

The city council instructed the Little Rock police chief to arrest Bates and other NAACP officials; she and the local branch president surrendered voluntarily. They were charged with failing to provide information about members for the public record, in violation of a city ordinance. In such a charged environment, of course, publicizing such information would have endangered the members in question. Though Bates was charged a fine by the judge, NAACP lawyers appealed and eventually won a reversal in the U.S. Supreme Court.

Despite such provisional victories, the physical safety of Bates, the students, and other activists was constantly threatened. "It took many weeks for me to become accustomed to seeing revolvers lying on tables in my own home," she remembered in The Long Shadow of Little Rock. "And shotguns, loaded with buckshot, standing ready near the doors." The students endured constant intimidation, and Bates saw herself hanged in effigy by segregationists. She was later threatened in her car by a white man, and bombs were thrown at the Bates house. The U.S. government answered her desperate telegrams by explaining that such incidents were a matter for local authorities.

Ultimately, the Little Rock nine were able to attend Central High, and many of them went on to impressive careers. The price for the L. C. and Daisy Bates was high, however; an orchestrated boycott of advertisers caused the newspaper's revenue to dry up quickly, and they were forced to shut it down in 1959. L. C. accepted an NAACP post the following year, which he retained until his retirement in 1971. Daisy, meanwhile, traveled to New York and spent two years writing her book. It was published in 1962 with a foreword by former first lady Eleanor Roosevelt. "This is a book which I hope will be read by every American," Roosevelt declared; adding in her conclusion that the volume "should shock the conscience of America and bring a realization of where we stand in the year 1962 in these United States."

Daisy Bates moved to Washington, D.C., and worked for the Democratic National Committee. She participated in the anti-poverty programs of the Lyndon Johnson administration, but was incapacitated by a stroke in 1965. The following year saw her donate a number of her papers, photographs, and other historical documents from the Little Rock crisis to the State Historical Society of Wisconsin.

In 1968, she moved to the town of Mitchellville, Arkansas, living in a mobile home and participating in a number of efforts to improve living conditions for the area's mostly Black residents. As a result of her tireless work with the city's Self-Help Project, new water and sewer systems were installed in the town, roads were paved, and a community centerwith swimming poolwas completed in 1972. When budget cuts by President Richard Nixon threatened the project, she protested bitterly. She retired two years later.

L. C. Bates died in 1980, but Daisy held out hope that the State Press would circulate once more. At last, in 1984, this longtime dream became a reality. "I said to myself, `If you're going to do it, do it now or forget it,'" she told Ebony. "One of the reasons I hadn't done it is I didn't have enough money on my own to finance it." A satisfactory arrangement was made in collaboration with school superintendent Dr. H. Benjamin Williams and the Rev. Robert Willingham. This partnershipwhich gave her two-thirds ownership allowed the paper to buy a new typesetting machine. The paper's first run sold out. "It's been fantastic, an awakening to me," she exclaimed. "And we are trying to address new issues. We're even getting requests from Vietnam veterans who want us to help them." One of the "Little Rock Nine," Ernest Green, served as the paper's national marketing director; he had previously held a position in the administration of President Jimmy Carter.

Times had changed, of course, and in addition to a smaller staff, the paper addressed different social realities. In keeping with her lifelong mission to instill pride, Daisy Bates saw that the paper used the phrase "Afro-American" instead of "black." She reasoned in Ebony that the former designation "gives you a heritage, a background of which to be proud." The year 1984 also saw her receive an honorary Doctor of Laws degree from the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville; the institution would ultimately be the home of the Daisy Bates Collection.

In 1986, the University of Arkansas Press republished The Long Shadow of Little Rock, which became the first reprinted edition ever to earn an American Book Award. The following year she sold the newspaper, but continued to act as a consultant. Little Rock paid perhaps the ultimate tribute, not only to Bates but to the new era she helped to initiate, by opening the Daisy Bates Elementary School. She periodically made public appearances with the Little Rock Nine, and swore in the Chicago Tribune, "I'll always continue to fight." On her 80th birthday, some 1,400 people gathered to celebrate her; and in 1996, wire services carried a photo of the wheelchair-bound activist carrying the Olympic torch in Atlanta, Georgia. The city's Journal-Constitution reported that she was met by a "mob scene," albeit one very different from those she had described in her harrowing book: "Friends, family and admirers, black and white, cheered, yelled encouragement and shed tears."

Daisy, along with the other members of the "Little Rock Nine" were awarded with the Congressional Gold Medal.

Personal Information
Born Daisy Lee Gatson, Huttig, AR, c. 1914. Married L. C. Bates (a journalist and insurance salesman; died 1980), 1942. Education: Attended Shorter College and Philander Smith College, both in Little Rock, AR. Addresses: HomeLittle Rock, AR.

Diamond Cross of Malta, Philadelphia Cotillion Society, 1958; honorary Doctor of Laws degree, University of Arkansas, 1984; National Book Award for reprint edition of The Long Shadow of Little Rock, 1988.

Publisher and activist, 1942-87. With L. C. Bates, published, edited, and wrote for Arkansas State Press newspaper, 1942-59; chairman, state conference of branches, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), 1952-59; published book The Long Shadow of Little Rock, 1962; worked for Democratic National Committee and government anti-poverty programs, c. early 1960s; community activist, Mitchellville, Arkansas, 1968-72; retired, 1974; reopened State Press as part owner, 1984; sold paper, 1987; Elementary School in Little Rock named for Bates, 1987; carried Olympic torch, Atlanta, GA, 1996.

Further Readings:

Bates, Daisy, The Long Shadow of Little Rock (memoir), McKay, 1962, reprinted, University of Arkansas Press, 1987.
Atlanta Journal-Constitution, May 26, 1996.
Chicago Tribune, April 4, 1993; February 20, 1994.
Ebony, September 1984, pp. 93-94.
Jet, September 21, 1987, p. 22.

Additional information was provided by notes on the Daisy Bates Papers from the internet site of the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville.

Friday, February 23, 2007

Zimbabwe Update: President Mugabe Celebrates 83rd Birthday

CNS: Cybercast News “Spin”

By Netfa Freeman
February 22nd, 2007
[Op-Ed: Media]

The extent of hypocrisy in American news media can be astounding, even when knowing that it’s a society that places profit over people.

The degree of sophistication of wolves dressed in “news” clothing is very instructive. Particularly regarding Western designs for Zimbabwe. Let us take note.

On January 17th, 2007 Cybercast News Service (CNS News) published an article centered on an event in which my program, the Social Action & Leadership School for Activists (SALSA) was involved. The article, “MLK Would Have Supported Zimbabwe's Mugabe, Activists Say” by Monisha Bansal is largely based on blatantly false and misleading information.

See: (

While I also take issue with many misrepresentations regarding complexity and context of the situation in Zimbabwe, I will confine this response to the falsehoods perpetrated against SALSA, the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), and myself.

Because I was called by CNS’ staff writer Bansal and interviewed over the phone about the event, it is hard to fathom how certain things were misrepresented. The extent of the false and misleading information in the article is a patent violation of CNS’ claim to serve “as a news source for individuals, news organizations and broadcasters who put a higher premium on balance than spin”. The article is so classic an example of “spin” that it could serve as such in any school of journalism. The article is completely contrary to any “endeavors to fairly present all legitimate sides of a story and debunk popular, albeit incorrect, myths about cultural and policy issues”, another claim of CNS News.

Given the obvious political slant and bias of the article it is not hard to determine the motivations behind resorting to such falsehoods. In short, I, SALSA and IPS were used as a straw man to demonize Zimbabwe’s leading party ZANU-PF and President Robert Mugabe.

Let’s begin with the title of the article, which implies I or someone else at IPS had asserted Martin Luther King would support President Mugabe. This was not something I ever said and I am certain no one else at IPS said such a thing since many of my colleagues respectfully disagree with my position on Zimbabwe.

It’s worth noting that IPS as a whole never takes positions as an institution and any opinions belong only to the person involved. I did say to Bansal that I believed Dr. King would have opposed the sanctions against Zimbabwe, which is a completely different assertion.

The first false statement in the article is “The Social Action and Leadership School for Activists (SALSA) raised some eyebrows when it hosted a representative of President Robert Mugabe's government at its annual Martin Luther King Day event on Monday.”

I explicitly told Bansal that SALSA was not the host of the program but that we were only helping to promote it. We were not even considered a co-sponsor. I told her that the program was hosted and organized by the Contee African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Zion Church, where it was held.

I even gave Bansal the name and phone number of the contact person in the church responsible for the event but she neglected to contact them. The falsification of this key fact is of course the fundamental basis that condemns the article. It seems I was an easier target than the church, given the successes of the broad and largely church-based anti-sanctions movement regarding Iraq, which had to fight against similarly irresponsible journalists who defined opposition to those sanctions as "support for Saddam Hussein".

A second statement that further perpetuates false information and also demonstrates the article’s bias was “SALSA, a project of the ‘progressive’ Institute for Policy Studies, hosts the event each year, focusing on ‘some aspect of social justice’ that they believe would embody the ideals of Dr. King.”

Of course I never told the interviewer that SALSA hosts such an event each year because it is the church that does so. Her cute use of quotations around the word “progressive” seems to be a way of denigrating IPS. Because my personal analysis and convictions about Zimbabwe are not endorsed by IPS, nor shared by most of my colleagues, it is obvious that this article will grossly mislead its readers and will continue to do so as long as it appears on their website.

The third lie is the statement “Nefta Freeman, the organization’s director, told Cybercast News Service that this year’s keynote speaker, Zimbabwean Ambassador Machivanyika Mapuranga, ‘was the best person we could think of to talk about those kind of things.’” Maybe that my first name is spelled incorrectly—it is Netfa—is an indication that the “journalist”, Bansal was not listening closely enough to what I was saying.

Again, I did not organize the program—however this statement makes it appear as though I did and that I believed no other person except the Ambassador was the best to speak about Dr. King’s legacy of social justice. Furthermore, I am not “the organization’s director”. I am the program director for SALSA.

No reflection on Ambassador Mapuranga, whom I respect for his knowledge but I can think of and personally know many people who can speak on such a topic. What I did say, but probably should have left to the event’s organizer, was that the organizer chose the Ambassador because he was the best person to give the public the perspective and analysis of ZANU PF and the Zimbabwe government.

This of course this is a completely different and perfectly reasonable statement. Also, given the Ambassador’s academic and lecturing credentials, he was very appropriate for speaking on the event’s topic, Dr. King’s Impact on Africa. The topic of the event was not mentioned once in the CNS article. Because of the political stigma being attached to Zimbabwe, I can see no other objective for this falsehood than a veiled attempt to belittle my personal political character and understanding.

It is a lie when the article states the following: “‘The Land Reclamation Program in Zimbabwe...has bought land to over 250,000 indigenous families’, the Institute for Policy Studies said on its website.” While I do not dispute the veracity of this statement, it has never appeared on the IPS website. It had appeared as part of the wording of the promo for the event on SALSA’s website. Again, I remind the reader we did not organize it.

Lastly, the statement, “Freeman of SALSA said that even if the sanctions against Zimbabwe were imposed for sound reasons, ‘what they're doing really hurts the average, everyday people in Zimbabwe,’” is a misrepresentation of what I said because I do not think the reasons for sanctions against Zimbabwe are sound, and would not have said so.

The lesson here is how imperialist news media is used to advance its hegemony. The article has so many falsehoods about the event, about IPS, SALSA and myself that time and space will not allow me address in this response the slanderous politics included against Zimbabwe herself.

For that is subject matter for another article, all together.

Netfa Freeman is the Director of the Social Action & Leadership School for Activists at the Institute for Policy Studies and an organizer with PALO, the Pan-African Liberation Organization. He is also co-author of the Black Star News article "Zimbabwe: Psychosis Of Denial." He can be reached at

To comment on this article, or to advertise with us, or to subscribe to New York’s favorite Pan-African weekly investigative newspaper, or to send us news tips, please call (212) 481-7745 or contact

Our motto: "Speaking Truth To Empower."

President Robert Mugabe: Legacy of a freedom fighter

THIS is the first of a five-part series in which The Herald looks at the legacy of President Mugabe focusing on the principles of liberation, reconciliation, democracy, education, health, and land reform. In the introductory article today, Caesar Zvayi looks at President Mugabe, the Freedom Fighter, not only for Zimbabwe, but the entire continent.

WHEN New African magazine launched an online international survey to find the three greatest Africans of all time, Zimbabwean President, Robert Gabriel Mugabe, was voted the third greatest in a poll that spanned nine months.

The survey that ran from December 2003 to August 2004 saw President Mugabe gracing third place after former South African president Nelson Mandela and Ghana’s founding president Dr Kwame Nkrumah.

In analysing the results, the magazine said: ‘‘President Mugabe’s high score is particularly interesting given that in the last four years a high profile campaign in the (international) media has painted him in bad light.’’

Taking nothing from the other two leaders, President Mugabe’s high score at a time he was being demonised on a daily basis by the global Weapons of Mass Deception — CNN, BBC and other Western agencies — implies that, all things being equal, he would have emerged overall winner.

This view is buttressed by the fact that Dr Nkrumah and Madiba lasted no more than five years at the helm thus they did not create many detractors.

Because of this, analysts were, therefore, agreed that the greatest African of all time is actually President Mugabe who has become the embodiment of the aspirations of the entire developing world.

The pollsters hailed him for his aptitude, resilience, independence, bravery and unflinching commitment to the goals and objectives of the Second Chimurenga.

He was extolled for being a great freedom fighter and principled revolutionary who has remained true to his people in spite of having been at the helm for over 20 years then — a tenure that would have seen lesser men submit to the trappings of power.

Even British premier Tony Blair had to voice his frustrations at his failure to get Africa to demonise President Mugabe saying African leaders revere him as a freedom fighter.

President Mugabe led Zimbabwe to independence after a 14-year war of attrition brought Ian Smith’s settler regime to its knees.

He spent 11 of those years incarcerated by the Smith regime in dehumanising conditions, but that did not break his spirit.

Through it all, he refused to compromise with the regime as he maintained that only its complete capitulation was acceptable.

His resolve was understandable given the irrationality of the colonial regime’s excesses that were aptly summed by New African Editor — Baffour Ankomah — in his special report on the Silver Jubilee celebrations as follows:

--No African was allowed to keep more than six herd of cattle; any Rhodesian government official was empowered to seize the excess.

The impact of this spurious edict in a country whose major economic activity was agriculture can not be over emphasised.

--No African was allowed to go out after 6pm without a letter (deemed as a pass) written by a European giving the date and time limits of the travel or outing.

--No African was allowed to sell his maize produce directly to the state-owned Grain Marketing Board. That was reserved for white farmers. The African sold his produce only to the Farmers Co-operatives run by white farmers, who then sold on the maize at huge profit to the GMB.

--No African was allowed in a supermarket. There was a hole in the wall where all African shoppers were made to queue for hours, and from where they shouted at the African shop assistants inside the supermarket what they wanted to buy.

--No African was allowed in First Street in the heart of the capital, Salisbury (now Harare) where all the big banks, owned by white companies, were situated. In this way, Africans were denied capital to start their own businesses.

The place for the African was on white-owned farms and homes where they toiled for hours as labourers and domestics for very little pay. Pavements were reserved for white people, and no African was allowed to walk on them even when there were no whites around. Africans walked on the road, which they shared with cars owned by white people.

If an African saw a white person on the pavement, he stood aside, at attention, until the white person walked past.

--No African was allowed to vote. That was reserved for whites. It took a bitter war of liberation in which precious African blood was shed in copious quantities to get the ballot others take for granted.

--No African was allowed to drink European beer."

In the end, President Mugabe had to accept some compromises at the Lancaster House Constitutional Conference, only because leaders of the Frontline States indicated that their fragile post-independence economies could not continue sustaining the war effort where Peace was an option.

His unwavering commitment to the total independence of Zimbabwe is actually the reason why the West, that harbours hopes of recolonising the continent by proxy, want him out as they consider him a stumbling block to their designs.

President Mugabe’s image as a liberation icon is evident in the way he has defended other African countries as well, and his principled stand at all international forums.

In the mid-80s, Zimbabwe’s intervention in the Mozambican civil war helped stave off American designs to recolonise the country under the guise of the rebel Renamo of Alfonso Dhlakama.

The rebels were kept at bay till they had the good sense to reform and transform themselves into a political party that sought to attain power through democratic means.

Renamo has since contested several polls in Mozambique.

In 1997 President Mugabe, who was then chair of the Sadc Organ on Defence and Security Co-operation, sent troops into the DRC along with Angola and Namibia during a campaign code-named Operation Sovereign Legitimacy.

This followed the invasion of the DRC by troops backed by Rwanda and Uganda at the behest of the Americans who are accused of orchestrating the assassination of President Laurent Desire Kabila so that they could continue looting the country’s resources.

Zimbabwe’s intervention, that drew the ire of the rabble-rousing Western nations, provided the foundation for the stability that saw the DRC, late last year, hold its first democratic elections in 45 years.

Analysts are agreed that apart from the land reform programme, Zimbabwe’s intervention in the DRC also accounts for the Western backlash on Harare.

On March 7 2003, Zimbabwe again etched another notch on its liberation sabre when it foiled a coup bid in Equatorial Guinea.

In an operation that spanned several months, Zimbabwean security forces arrested 67 mercenaries at Harare International Airport when their Boeing 727 landed in attempt to pick up a consignment of arms they wanted to use to overthrow the government of President Obiang Nguema Mbasogo in Malabo.

Where lesser leaders would have capitulated in the face of Western onslaught President Mugabe has remained resolute and actually took the fight to his persecutors who responded by imposing a travel ban on him reminiscent of the colonial pass law, highlighted above.

In recognition of his enduring liberation legacy, President Mugabe has been honoured by several countries among them Britain that is currently at the forefront of trying to trash his legacy.

In 1994, Queen Elizabeth II made him an honorary Knight Commander of the Order of the Bath, entitling him to use the post-nominal letters KCB, after his name.

On September 15 1988, the US-based Hunger Project honoured him with the Africa Price for Leadership for the Sustainable End of Hunger.

Cuba conferred him the Jose Marti International Award for his sterling contribution to the liberation of Zimbabwe. Created in 1994, the Martí award was instituted by Unesco’s Executive Board "at the initiative of the Government of Cuba."

And "promotes and rewards an activity of outstanding merit in accordance with the ideals and spirit of José Martí. By embodying a nation’s aspiration to sovereignty and its struggle for liberty."

On November 7 2004, President Nguema decorated President Mugabe with the Great Ring of the Independence of Equatorial Guinea, that country’s highest honour for foiling the coup bid.

On May 4 last year, President Bingu wa Mutharika of Malawi named his country’s main highway that links Blantyre and Mulanje after President Mugabe, describing him as a fighter and democrat in the true sense of the word.

Venezuelan president, Hugo Chavez also conferred President Mugabe with his country’s highest honour.

Today Zimbabweans are enjoying total independence, due to President Mugabe’s resolve to complete the last lap of Independence started by the nation’s forebears during the First Chimurenga III years ago.

His constant refrain, "Zimbabwe shall never be a colony again," is a source of inspiration to millions of Zimbabweans who defiantly hold their clenched fists aloft sending a strong message to would be aggressors that they would never betray his legacy.

Readers are invited to send in their contributions to or send SMS messages to 011433885.

Thursday, February 22, 2007

Agreement Reached on Burial of James Brown

Agreement Finally Reached on Burial of James Brown

Associated Press Writer

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) The six adult children of singer James Brown have agreed with his partner, Tomi Rae Hynie, on where the entertainer will be buried, an attorney for the woman said Tuesday.

Hynie's attorney, Robert Rosen, said the resting place is being kept confidential at the request of Brown's children. Rosen said the burial may take place in the "next few days."

Brown died Christmas Day at age 73. His body is being kept in a confidential location, said Charles Reid, manager of the C.A. Reid Funeral Home in Augusta, Ga., which handled Brown's funeral.

He said he checked on Brown on Tuesday, opening the gold casket to view the body.

"I do that constantly," Reid said. "That's the only way I can actually check him ... go in, open the casket and close it. And he's fine."

Meanwhile, a South Carolina judge in a ruling made public Tuesday said the trustees accused of mismanaging Brown's estate will keep handling his property and trust, but a special administrator will oversee their work.

The singer's six adult children were in an Aiken County court Feb. 9 in an attempt to remove three trustees who are handling the late singer's estate. They claim it has been mismanaged.

The children and Hynie had both asked the court to appoint a special administrator to oversee the trust.

Such an administrator "will protect the estate by permitting all claims to be pursued and investigated with the required due diligence, and will assist this Court in assessing the proper administration of the estate," Judge Doyet Early said in his ruling, dated Monday.

Rosen said he and his client were pleased with the appointment of a special administrator.

Brown's attorney, trustee Buddy Dallas, said he was pleased and vindicated by the decision.

"We told the court that we had no objection whatsoever to a special administrator and the court has now ruled that there were no improprieties on the part of the personal representatives," Dallas said.

Brown's children claimed in court papers last month that trustees had "mismanaged and otherwise dissipated assets and income of the trust to the detriment of James Brown" and that some of Brown's assets were in danger of being "lost or dissipated or stolen."

The trust is said to contain most of Brown's primary assets, including the late singer's music rights and his 60-acre Beech Island home, and is separate from Brown's will filed last week. The will called for personal possessions such as clothes, jewelry, boats and automobiles to be divided among the children.

Dallas said the children's petition "delayed the wishes and legacy of Mr. Brown." But it won't likely be the last hearing over the singer's estate.

"As long as there's a lawyer who can earn a fee, this will go on," Dallas said.

Attorneys for Brown's children did not immediately returns calls for comment Tuesday.

US Appeals Court Upholds Denial of Habeas Corpus

US appeals court upholds denial of habeas corpus rights to Guantánamo detainees

By Joe Kay
21 February 2007

The US District Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled Tuesday that prisoners held by the US military at Guantánamo Bay do not have the right to challenge their indefinite detention in US courts.

The 2-1 ruling in the combined cases of Al Odah v. USA and Boumediene v. Bush defends the creation of a category of prisoners denied the most basic democratic rights. It upholds a central component of an October 2006 law, the Military Commissions Act, depriving “alien unlawful enemy combatants” of the writ of habeas corpus.

The case was brought by lawyers representing most of the 400 prisoners currently held at Guantánamo Bay.

As the World Socialist Web Site editorial board wrote at time of the passage of the Military Commissions Act, “The legislation adopted by the House of Representatives Wednesday and the Senate Thursday, legalizing the Bush administration’s policy of torture and indefinite detention without trial, as well as kangaroo-court procedures for Guantánamo detainees, marks a watershed for the United States.

“For the first time in American history, Congress and the White House have agreed to set aside the provisions of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and formally adopt methods traditionally identified with police states.”

Habeas corpus is a cornerstone of democratic rights extending back at least as far as the Magna Carta of 1215. It grants a prisoner the right to go to court to challenge his or her detention, and is therefore a fundamental guarantee against arbitrary imprisonment. For this reason, it is being attacked as part of an attempt to establish unconstrained executive power in the United States.

In denying the right of habeas corpus to prisoners at Guantánamo Bay, the Military Commissions Act denies these prisoners all rights and legal protection. Shayana Kadidal, a lawyer for the Center for Constitutional Rights, which represents many of the detainees, noted in a press release, “This decision empowers the president to do whatever he wishes to prisoners without any legal limitation as long as he does it offshore, and encourages such notorious practices as extraordinary rendition and a contempt for international human rights law.”

The basic issue involved in the case decided Tuesday is whether or not Congress acted constitutionally when it deprived the Guantánamo detainees of their habeas corpus rights. The majority on the appeals court panel (consisting of judges A. Raymond Randolph, who wrote the opinion, and David Sentelle) says that it did, while the dissenter (Clinton appointee Judge Judith Rogers) says it did not. The case will be appealed to the Supreme Court, where, with the addition of right-wing Bush appointees Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Joseph Alito, the appeals court decision stands a good chance of being upheld.

The Military Commissions Act was passed with substantial Democratic support in response to a 5-3 Supreme Court decision, issued in June of 2006, in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld. As part of the complex Supreme Court ruling in that case (which also declared unconstitutional the Bush administration’s system of military commissions for prisoners at Guantánamo Bay), the court found that an earlier law depriving detainees at Guantánamo of habeas corpus rights, the Detainee Treatment Act (DTA), did not apply to cases already pending in US courts.

In response, the Military Commission Act denied courts the right to hear any cases, including those already pending. The act also gave a congressional stamp of approval to an anti-democratic system of military commissions, allowed for the use of coerced testimony in these commissions, allowed the president to “interpret” the Geneva Conventions, and protected administration officials from future prosecution by amending the War Crimes Act. These other aspects of the act were not at issue in the case decided Tuesday.

Asserting that the detainees do not have habeas corpus rights, the majority declares, “Everyone who has followed the interaction between Congress and the Supreme Court knows full well that one of the primary purposes of the MCA (Military Commissions Act) was to overrule Hamdan.” In insisting that the Military Commissions Act applies to all cases, including pending habeas corpus cases, the majority decision states, “It is almost as if the proponents of these words [in the act] were slamming their fists on the table, shouting, ‘When we say “all,” we mean all—without exceptions!’” (Emphasis in original).

On the right of habeas corpus, the US Constitution states, “The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.” Judge Randolph argues that this provision does not apply to non-citizens outside of US territory, and holds that Guantánamo Bay technically belongs to Cuba, not the United States. According to Randolph, none of the prisoners at Guantánamo Bay have a constitutional right to habeas corpus, and therefore Congress did not act unconstitutionally in depriving them access to US courts.

In the course of his ruling, Randolph makes a significant statement suggesting that habeas corpus could be denied to anyone, including citizens, so long as they are not detained within the United States. Discussing the meaning of habeas corpus under British common law, which Randolph takes to encompass the complete extent of the right of habeas corpus today, he writes, “When agents of the [British] Crown detained prisoners outside the Crown’s dominions, it was understood that they were outside the jurisdiction of the writ. Even British citizens imprisoned in ‘remote islands, garrisons, and other places’ were ‘prevent[ed] from benefit of the law,’ which included access to habeas corpus.”

In her dissent, Judge Rogers argues that the Military Commissions Act violates the Constitution. She notes that in previous Supreme Court decisions, including the 2004 case of Rasul v. Bush, the Court has ruled that prisoners at Guantánamo Bay are under the jurisdiction of the US and US courts, even if “ultimate sovereignty” rests with Cuba. Because of this, the Supreme Court ruled,
“application of the habeas statute to persons detained at the [Guantánamo] base is consistent with the historical reach of the writ of habeas corpus.” The majority in the present case essentially ignores the Supreme Court precedent in Rasul.

If the prisoners have a right to habeas corpus, Rogers argues, Congress cannot suspend this right (without providing an adequate alternative) except under cases of rebellion or invasion. Rogers points out that Congress did not invoke these exceptions when it passed the Military Commissions Act, and that these conditions do not, in fact, apply. Therefore, the Military Commissions Act is unconstitutional.

“The MCA purports to withdraw that right [of habeas corpus] but does so in a manner that offends the constitutional constraint on suspension,” she writes. “The Suspension Clause limits the removal of habeas corpus, at least as the writ was understood in common law, to times of rebellion or invasion unless Congress provides an adequate alternative remedy.”

Rogers devotes a substantial portion of her opinion to arguing against the government’s position that the Combatant Status Review Tribunals (CSRTs) set up by the military are an adequate alternative to habeas corpus. The appeals court majority does not consider this question, but it may be a central issue in any Supreme Court appeal. The CSRTs—which are supposed to evaluate whether or not a prisoner is in fact an “unlawful enemy combatant”—deny the prisoners basic elements of due process.

The Court of Appeals ruling was issued by two extremely right-wing judges. Randolph was appointed to the DC Appeals Court by the first President Bush. He was the author of the appeals court ruling in Hamdan, upholding the current administration’s military commissions, which was subsequently overruled by the Supreme Court. Joining Randolph in that earlier decision was Judge John Roberts, who is now Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

Among Randolph’s history of reactionary rulings was his decision in 2005 to throw out a lawsuit against Vice President Dick Cheney which sought to force Cheney to reveal details about Energy Task Force meetings held early in the Bush administration’s first term.

Sentelle was a protégé of the ultra-right-wing, one-time segregationist Republican Senator Jesse Helms of North Carolina. He is best known for his role, while on the District Court of Appeals, in appointing Republican partisan Kenneth Starr as independent counsel in the Whitewater investigation of President Bill Clinton.

Starr transformed the investigation of a failed real estate venture long before Clinton became president into a prolonged campaign to unseat Clinton, culminating in the Monica Lewinsky sex scandal and Clinton’s impeachment.

On the DC Court of Appeals, Sentelle has consistently ruled in favor of expanding presidential powers, attacking democratic rights, and defending the interests of big business.

The attack on habeas corpus has been possible only because of the complicity of the Democratic Party. The Democrats refused to mount a filibuster in the Senate against the Military Commissions Act in 2006. In the minority at the time, a filibuster was the only way for the Democrats to prevent passage of the bill, which had the support of almost all of the Republican legislators. A significant section of Democrats voted for the bill (34 in the House of Representatives and 12 in the Senate).

The Appeals Court ruling, including the dissent, can be found at:

Malcolm X on 'God's Judgement of White America (December 1963)

God's Judgement of White America (The Chickens Come Home to Roost)

By Malcolm X
Edited by Imam Benjamin Karim
December 1 , 1963
Note: This speech was delivered before Malcolm left the Nation of Islam and accepted true Islam -- so his views in this speech do not reflect his own or those he held near the end of his life.

This speech is sometimes called "The Chickens Come Home To Roost," because of an answer Malcolm X gave in response to a question following the speech. The question concerned the late President John Kennedy. It was Malcolm X's answer, that the Presidents death was a case of "chickens coming home to roost" -- that the violence that Kennedy had failed to stop had come back to him, this resulted in the Elijah Muhammad silencing him. Malcolm X left the Nation of Islam a short time later.

The Honorable Elijah Muhammad teaches us that as it was the evil sin of slavery that caused the downfall and destruction of ancient Egypt and Babylon, and of ancient Greece, as well as ancient Rome, so it was the evil sin of colonialism (slavery, nineteenth-century European style) that caused the collapse of the white nations in present-day Europe as world powers. Unbiased scholars and unbiased observers agree that the wealth and power of white Europe has rapidly declined during the nineteen-year period between World War II and today.

So we of this present generation are also witnessing how the enslavement of millions of black people in this country is now bringing White America to her hour of judgment, to her downfall as a respected nation. And even those Americans who are blinded by childlike patriotism can see that it is only a matter of time before White America too will be utterly destroyed by her own sins, and all traces of her former glory will be removed from this planet forever.

The Honorable Elijah Muhammad teaches us that as it was divine will in the case of the destruction of the slave empires of the ancient and modern past, America's judgement and destruction will also be brought about by divine will and divine power. Just as ancient nations paid for their sins against humanity, White America must now pay for her sins against twenty-two million "Negroes." White America's worst crimes her hypocrisy and her deceit. White America pretends to ask herself: "What do these Negroes want?" White America knows that four hundred years of cruel bondage has made these twenty-two million ex-slaves too (mentally) blind to see what they really want.

White America should be asking herself: "What does God want for these twenty-two million ex-slaves?" Who will make White America know what God wants? Who will present God's plan to White America? What is God's solution to the problem caused by the presence of twenty-two million unwanted slaves here in America? And who will present God's solution?

We, the Muslims who follow The Honorable Elijah Muhammad, believe whole-heartedly in the God of justice. We believe in the Creator, whose divine power and laws of justice created and sustain the universe. We believe in the all-wise Supreme Being: the great God who is called "Jehovah" by the monotheistic Hebrews. We do not believe in the Trinity (or "plurality of gods") as advocated by the Polytheistic Christians. We who are Muslims call God by his true name: Allah, the great God of the Universe, the Lord of all the worlds, the Master of the Day of Judgement. The Honorable Elijah Muhammad teaches us that Allah is the true name of the divine Supreme Being, and that Islam is an Arabic word which means complete submission to God's will, or obedience to God's guidance.

We who are Muslims believe in this religion that is described in the Arabic language by the word "Islam." This religion, Islam, teaches us submission to God's will and obedience to God's guidance. It gives us the moral discipline that makes it easy for us to walk the path of truth and righteousness. "Muslim" is an Arabic word, and it describes a person whose religion is Islam. A Muslim is one who practices complete submission and obedience to God's will. Here in America the word "Muslim" is westernized or anglicized and pronounced "Moslem." Muslim and Moslem are actually the same word. The true believers in Allah call themselves Muslims, but the nonbelieving infidels refer to Muslims as Moslems or Muhammadans.

Many of the weak, backsliding Muslims who come to this country have also adopted some of these same pronunciations coined for them by the infidels. But we don't condemn these "orthodox" Muslims, because the reward of the believer, as well as the chastisement of the nonbeliever and the backslider, comes only from Allah. Allah is the only judge. He alone is master of this Day of Judgment in which we now live.

Why is the American white man so set against the twenty-two million "Negroes" learning about the religion of Islam? Islam is the religion that elevates the morals of the people who want to do right. Just by teaching us the religion of Islam, and by showing us how to live the life of a Muslim, the Honorable Elijah Muhammad is turning hundreds of thousands of Americans "Negroes" away from drunkenness, drug addiction, nicotine, stealing, lying, cheating, gambling, profanity, filth, fornication, adultery, and the many other acts of immorality that are almost inseparable from this indecent Western society. The Honorable Elijah Muhammad has restored our cultural roots, our racial identity, our racial pride, and our racial confidence. He has given us the incentive and energy to stand on our own feet and walk for ourselves.

Just as we believe in one God, whose proper name is Allah, we believe also that this one God has only one religion, the religion of Islam. We believe that we are living in the time of "prophecy fulfillment," the time predicted by the ancient prophets of God, when this one God would use his one religion to establish one world here on earth -- the world of Islam, or Muslim world...which only means: a world of universal brotherhood that will be based upon the principles of truth, freedom, justice, equality , righteousness, and peace.

But before God can set up his new world, the Muslim world, or world of Islam, which will be established on the principles to truth, peace, and brotherhood, God himself must first destroy this evil Western world, the white world...a wicked world, ruled by a race of devils, that preaches falsehood, practices slavery, and thrives on indecency and immorality. You and I are living in that great Doomsday, the final hour, when the ancient prophets predicted that God himself would appear in person, in the flesh, and with divine power He would bring about the judgement and destruction of this present evil world. The hour of judgement and doom is upon White America for the evil seeds of slavery and hypocrisy she has sown; and God himself has declared that no one shall escape the doom of this Western world, except those who accept Allah as God, Islam as his only religion, and The Honorable Elijah Muhammad as his Messenger to the twenty-two million ex-slaves here in America, twenty-two million "Negroes" who are referred to in the symbolism of the Scriptures as the Lost Sheep, the Lost Tribes, or the Lost People of God.

White America is doomed! God has declared that The Honorable Elijah Muhammad is your only means of escape. When you reject The Honorable Elijah Muhammad, when you refuse to hear his message or heed his warning you are closing your only door of escape. When you cut yourself off from him, you cut yourself off from your only way out of the divine disaster that is fast approaching White America.

Before your pride causes you to harden your heart and further close your ears, and before your ignorance provokes laughter, search the Christian Scriptures. Search even the histories of other nations that sat in the same positions of wealth, power, and authority that these white Americans now hold...and see what God did to them. If God's unchanging laws of justice caught up with every one of the slave empires of the past, how dare you think White America can escape the harvest of unjust seeds planted by her white forefathers against our black forefathers here in the land of slavery!

According to the Scriptures, when God was going to destroy the wicked world with the flood, He first raised up a man named Noah, and missioned him as a warner to warn the wicked world that the flood was coming, and that he, Noah, was their only way out ....But their own wickedness and lust for evil made them too blind to see Noah, and they were thus destroyed by the flood of their own evil deeds. Again, when God prepared to destroy the wicked world of the Sodomites with the fire of his wrath, He first raised up a man Lot, and missioned him to warn the Sodomites of the fire that was coming to destroy them because of their evil deeds, and to let them know that Lot was their only way out....But the Sodomites' addiction to their own lowly passions also made them too blind to see the divinity of Lot's mission and too deaf to heed his warning. They inherited the sea of fire and brimstone as reward for their rejection of God's servant.

Still later. when God prepared to turn his wrath upon the Egyptians, that House of Bondage, or Land of Slavery, God raised his servant Moses as a warner to the cruel slave master, Pharaoh. Moses' message to the slave master was simple and clear: "Let my people go...Let them no longer be segregated by you; stop trying to deceive them with false promises of integration with you; let them separate themselves from you. Let them go with me to a place wherein the God of our forefathers has prepared a land for us...a land in which we can serve our own God, practice righteousness, and live in peace among our own kind." And Moses warned Pharaoh: "If you will not let them separate from you and go with me, then our God will destroy you and your entire slave empire from the face of this earth."

Pharaoh's wealth and power made him too proud to listen to the little inarticulate ex-slave named Moses. He ridiculed Moses' lack of eloquence. White America's attitude today is the same toward The Honorable Elijah Muhammad. They ridicule him because of his lack of education and his cotton-field origin in Georgia. White America chooses to listen to the Negro civil rights leaders, the Big Six. Six puppets who have been trained by the whites in white institutions and then placed over our people by these same whites as "spokesmen" for our people. These handpicked "spokesmen" do nothing but parrot for the whites exactly what they know the whites want to hear.

Pharaoh used this same strategy to oppose Moses. Pharaoh also set up puppet-magicians to parrot his lies and to deceive the Hebrew slaves into thinking that Moses was a hate-teacher, an extremist, who was advocating violence and racial supremacy simply because Moses was trying to restore unto his people their own lost culture, their lost identity, their lost racial dignity...the same as The Honorable Elijah Muhammad is trying to do among the twenty-two million "Negro" slaves here in this modern House of Bondage today. By opposing Moses, Pharaoh was actually opposing Moses' God; thus that same God (Jehovah) was forced to drown Pharaoh in the Red Sea, destroy his slave empire, and remove the Egyptian influence from the face of this earth.

History is repeating itself today. America faces the same fate at the hands of Almighty God. That same divine handwriting is now on the walls of this modern American House of Bondage. We, the Muslims who follow The Honorable Elijah Muhammad, believe that the symbolic stories in these ancient Scriptures paint a prophetic picture of today, of America, and of the twenty-two million "Negroes" herein America....We believe that our present generation is witnessing the fulfillment of these divine prophecies, through the work being done among our people here in America today by The Honorable Elijah Muhammad.

This little, meek, humble, inarticulate ex-slave is a modern Noah, a modern Lot, a modern Moses...a modern Daniel. In fact, he is a modern David, and like ancient David The Honorable Elijah Muhammad has refused the carnal weapons of this wicked world and, armed only with a "slingshot" and "stones of truth," this modern David is battering the head of this modern Goliath (giant America), with a doctrine that no "helmet of falsehood" or "shield of deceit" can withstand...and it is only a matter time, before The Honorable Elijah Muhammad's gospel of truth will make this American "giant of falsehood" topple and fall for ever.

The Honorable Elijah Muhammad teaches us to believe in all of the prophets (including prophet Jesus), all of the Scriptures, the resurrection of the dead (not the resurrection of the physical dead, but the resurrection of the mentally dead American Negroes); also Judgment Day and Doomsday (which only means: the judgment of this wicked world and its destruction by God himself).

The Honorable Elijah Muhammad teaches us belief but also the principles of Muslim practice:

1) We practice prayer toward the Holy City of Mecca five times daily.

2) We make charitable contributions toward the spread of Islam, or to spread this divine truth that will save our people from the destruction of this wicked Western world.

3) We practice fasting (we eat only one meal every twenty-four hours, and we abstain from all food for three days out of every month of the year...and we fast also during the holy month of Ramadan.)

4) Those of us who can afford it strive to make the pilgrimage to the Holy City, Mecca, at least once during out lifetime. The Honorable Elijah Muhammad and two of his sons made this trip in December of 1959, and others of his followers have been making it since then.

The Honorable Elijah Muhammad's mission as messenger is to remind America that God has not forgotten America's crimes against his Long-Lost people, who have spent four hundred miserable years in this land of bondage. His mission is to warn America of the divine destruction that twill soon rain down upon her from the very skies above her. His mission is to warn America to repent, and to atone for her sins against God's people...or face complete destruction and permanent removal from the face of this earth...and removal not only as a nation but removal even as a race! The Honorable Elijah Muhammad's divine mission, his message, and his work here in America is the same as that of Noah, Lot, Moses, and Daniel. He is a warner to our white oppressor, but a savior to the oppressed. He is preaching the divine execution of the wicked slave master (whom God can justifiably hold responsible for all sins); but he preaches forgiveness and salvation for the Negro ex-slaves, who have been made so deaf, dumb, and mentally blind by the slave master that no just God could now condemn these American Negroes for their sinful, ignorant behavior.

When The Honorable Elijah Muhammad says "end of the world," he does not mean the end of the earth; he is referring to the end of a race of "world of people," and their removal from this earth: the removal of their world. There are many "worlds" here on this earth: the Buddhist world, Hindu world, Jewish world, Christian world -- Capitalist world, Communist world, Socialist world -- Eastern world and Western world -- Oriental world and Occidental world -- dark world and white world. Which of these many worlds has come to the end of its rope, the end of its time? Look around you at all of the signs and you will agree that it is the end of time for the Western world, the European world, the Christian world, the white world.

The time is past when the white world can exercise unilateral authority and control over the dark world. The independence and power of the dark world is on the increase; the dark world is rising in wealth, power, prestige, and influence. It is the rise of he dark world that is causing the fall of the white world. As the white man loses his power to oppress and exploit the dark world, the white man's own wealth (power or "world") decreases. His world is on its way down; it is on its way out...and it is the will and power of God himself that is bringing an end to the white world.

You and I were born at this turning point on history; we are witnessing the fulfillment of prophecy. Our present generation is witnessing the end of colonialism, Europeanism, Westernism, or "White-ism"...the end of white supremacy, the end of the evil white man's unjust rule. I must repeat: The end of the world only means the end of a certain "power." The end of colonialism ends the world (or power) of the colonizer. The end of Europeanism ends the world (or power) of the European...and the end of "White-ism" ends the world (or power) of THE WHITE MAN.

According to the Christian Bible, Judgment Day is that final hour when God will cause "those who led others into captivity to go into captivity themselves"...and "those who killed others with the sword to be killed by the sword of justice themselves." Justice only means that the wicked slave master must reap the fruit (or harvest) of the evil seeds of slavery he has planted. This is justice! Other slave empires received justice, and now White America must receive justice. According to White America's own evil past, which is clearly recorded on the pages of history, so shall God judge her today.

Before God can bring about this divine destruction, He must first separate the innocent from the guilty, the righteous from the wicked, the oppressed from the oppressor, the exploited from the exploiter, the slaves from the slave master. God never integrates his people with those who are not his people. The Scripture says God will separate his (black) sheep from the (white) goats, and the wheat from the tare. The goats are to be slaughtered and the tare cast to the burning flame...while the sheep are to be gathered into his pasture and the wheat into his barn.

In like manner God has prepared a Doomsday (a day of slaughter, a lake of fire) for this sinful white world of colonizers, enslavers, oppressors, exploiters, lynchers...and all others who refuse to repent and atone at the end of this white world. God has also prepared a refuge, a haven of salvation, for those who will accept his last Messenger and heed his last warning.

White America is doomed! Death and devastating destruction hang at this very moment in the skies over America. But why must her divine execution take place? Is it too late for her to avoid this catastrophe?

All the prophets of the past listed America as number one among the guilty that would be too proud, and too blind, to repent and atone when God's last Messenger is raised in her midst to warn her. America's last chance, her last warning, is coming from the lips of the Honorable Elijah Muhammad today. Accept him and be saved; reject him and be damned! It is written that White America will reject him; it is also written that White America will be damned and doomed... and the prophets who make these prophecies are never wrong in their divine predictions.

White America refuses to study, reflect, and learn a lesson from history; ancient Egypt didn't have to be destroyed. It was her corrupt government, the crooked politicians, who caused her destruction. Pharaoh hired Hebrew magicians to try and fool their own people into thinking they would soon be integrated into the mainstream of that country's life. Pharaoh didn't want the Hebrews to listen to Moses' message of separation. Even in that day separation was God's solution to the "slave's problem." By opposing Moses, the magicians were actually choosing sides against the God of their own people.

In like manner, modern Negro magicians are hired by the American government to oppose The Honorable Elijah Muhammad today. They pose as Negro "leaders." They have been hired by this white government (white so-called liberals) to make our people her think that integration into this doomed white society will soon solve our problem.

The Honorable Elijah Muhammad warns us daily: The only permanent solution to America's race problem is the complete separation of these twenty-two million ex-slaves from our white slave master, and the return of these ex-slaves to our own land, where we can then live in peace and security among our people. The Honorable Elijah Muhammad warns us daily: The American government is trying to trick her twenty-two million ex-slaves with promises that she never intends to keep. the Crooked politicians in the government are working with the Negro civil rights leaders, but not to solve the race problem. The greedy politicians who run this government give lip-service to the civil rights struggle only to further their own selfish interests. And their main interest as politicians is to stay in power.

In this deceitful American game of power politics, the Negroes (i.e., the race problem, the integration and civil rights issues) are nothing but tools, used by one group of whites called Liberals against another group of whites called Conservatives, either to get into power or to remain in power. Among whites here in America, the political teams are no longer divided into Democrats and Republicans. The whites who are now struggling for control of the American political throne are divided into "liberal" and "conservative" camps. The white liberals from both parties cross party lines to work together toward the same goal, and white conservatives from both parties do likewise.

The white liberal differs from the white conservative only in one way: the liberal is more deceitful than the conservative. The liberal is more hypocritical than the conservative. Both want power, but the white liberal is the one who has perfected the art of posing as the Negro's friend and benefactor; and by winning the friendship, allegiance, and support of the Negro, the white liberal is able to use the Negro as a pawn or tool in this political "football game" that is constantly raging between the white liberals and white conservatives.

Politically the American Negro is nothing but a football and the white liberals control this mentally dead ball through tricks of tokenism: false promises of integration and civil rights. In this profitable game of deceiving and exploiting the political politician of the American Negro, those white liberals have the willing cooperation of the Negro civil rights leaders. These "leaders" sell out our people for just a few crumbs of token recognition and token gains. These "leaders" are satisfied with token victories and token progress because they themselves are nothing but token leaders.

According to a New York Herald-Tribune editorial (dated February 5,1960), out of eleven million qualified Negro voters, only 2,700,000 actually took time to vote. This means that, roughly speaking, only three million of the eleven million Negroes who are qualified to vote actually take an active part. The remaining eight million remain voluntarily inactive...and yet this small (three million) minority of Negro voters hold the decisive edge in determining who will be the next President.

If who will be the next President is influenced by only three million Negro voters, it is easy to understand why the presidential candidates of both political parties put on such a false show with the Civil Rights Bill and with false promises of integration. They must impress the three million voting Negroes who are the actual "integration seekers." If such a fuss is made over these three million "integration seekers," what would presidential candidates have to do to appease the eight million nonvoting Negroes, if they ever decide to become politically active? Who are the eight million nonvoting Negroes; what do they want, and why don't they vote?

The three million Negro voters are the so-called middle-class Negroes, referred to by the late Howard University sociologist, E. Franklin Frazier, as the "black bourgeoisie," who have been educated to think as patriotic "individualists," with no racial pride, and who therefore look forward hopefully to the future "integrated-intermarried" society promised them by the white liberals and the Negro "leaders." It is with this hope that the "integration-minded" three million remain an active part of the white-controlled political parties. But it must never be overlooked that these three million "integration seekers" are only a small minority of the eleven million potential Negro voters.

The eight million nonvoting Negroes are in the majority; they are the downtrodden black masses. The black masses have refused to vote, or to take part in politics, because they reject the Uncle Tom approach of the Negro leadership that has been handpicked for them by the white man. These Uncle Tom leaders do not speak for the Negro majority; they don't speak for the black masses. They speak for the "black bourgeoisie," the brainwashed, whiteminded, middle-class minority who are ashamed of black, and don't want to be identified with the black masses, and are therefore seeking to lose their "black identity" by mixing, mingling, intermarrying, and integrating with the white man.

The race problem can never be solved by listening to this white-minded minority. The white man should try to learn what the black masses want, and the only way to learn what the black masses wants is by listening to the man who speaks for the black masses of America. The one man here in America who speaks for the downtrodden, dissatisfied black masses is this same man so many of our people are flocking to see and hear. This same Mr. Muhammad who is labeled by the white man as a black supremacist and as a racist.

If the three million whiter-minded Negroes are casting their ballots for integration and intermarriage, what do the nonvoting black masses want? Find out what the black masses want, and then perhaps America's grave race problem can be solved.

Think how the late President himself got into office by only scant margin which was "donated" to him by Negro voters, and think how many governors and other white politicians hold their seats (some by less than five thousand votes). Only then can you understand the importance of these white liberals place on their control of the Negro vote! The white liberals hate The Honorable Elijah Muhammad because they know their present position in the power structure stems form their ability to deceive and to exploit the Negro, politically as well as economically.

They know that The Honorable Elijah Muhammad's divine message will make our people (1) wake up, (2) clean up, (3) stand up. They know that once The Honorable Elijah Muhammad is able to resurrect the Negro from this mental grave of ignorance, by teaching him the truth about himself and his real enemy, the Negro will then be able to see and think for himself. Once the Negro learns to think for himself, he will no longer allow the white liberal to use him as a helpless football in the white man's crooked game of "power politics."

Let us examine briefly some of the tricky strategy used by white liberals to harness and exploit the political energies of the Negro. The crooked politicians in Washington, D.C., purposely make a big noise over the proposed civil rights legislation. By blowing up the civil rights issue they skillfully add false importance to the Negro civil rights "leaders." Once the image of these Negro civil rights "leaders" has been blown up way beyond its proper proportion, these same Negro civil rights "leaders" are then used by white liberals to influence and control the Negro voters, all for the benefit of the white politicians who pose as liberals, who pose as friends of the Negro.

The white conservatives aren't friends of the Negro either, but they at least don't try to hide it. They are like wolves; they show their teeth in a snarl that keeps the Negro always aware of where he stands with them. But the white liberals are foxes, who also show their teeth to the Negro but pretend that they are smiling. The white liberals are more dangerous than the conservatives; they lure the Negro, and as the Negro runs from the growling wolf, he flees into the open jaws of the "smiling" fox.

The job of the Negro civil rights leader is to make the Negro forget that the wolf and the fox both belong to the (same) family. Both are canines; and no matter which one of them the Negro places his trust in, he never ends up in the White House, but always in the dog house.

The white liberals control the Negro and the Negro vote by controlling the Negro civil rights leaders. As long as they control the Negro civil rights leaders, they can also control and contain the Negro's struggle, and they can control the Negro's so-called revolt. The Negro "revolution" is controlled by these foxy white liberals, by the government itself. But the black revolution is controlled only by God.

The black revolution is the struggle of the nonwhites of this earth against their white oppressors. The black revolution has swept white supremacy out of Africa, out of Asia, and is getting ready to sweep it out of Latin America. Revolutions are based upon land.

Revolutionaries are the landless against the landlord. Revolutions are never peaceful, never loving, never nonviolent. Nor are they ever compromising. Revolutions are destructive and bloody.

Revolutionaries don't compromise with the enemy; they don't even negotiate. Like the flood in Noah's day, revolution drowns all opposition, or like the fire in Lot's day, the black revolution burns everything that gets in its path.

America is the last stronghold of white supremacy. The black revolution, which is international in nature and scope. is sweeping down upon America like a raging forest fire. It is only a matter of time before America herself will be engulfed by the b lack flames, these black fire brands. Whenever an uncontrollable forest fire is roaring down upon the farmhouse, the only way the farmer can fight that forest fire is by building a "backfire," a smaller fire that he himself can control. He then uses this "controlled fire" to fight the fire that is raging beyond his control.

Here in America, the black revolution (the "uncontrollable forest fire") is personified in the religious teachings, and the religious works, of The Honorable Elijah Muhammad. This great man of God cannot in any way be controlled by the white man, and he will not compromise in any way with the wrongs this government has inflicted upon our people.

The Negro "revolt" is controlled by the white man, the white fox. The Negro "revolution" is controlled by this white government. The leaders of the Negro "revolution" (the civil rights leaders) are all subsidized, influenced and controlled by the white liberals; and all of the demonstrations that are taking place on this country to desegregate lunch counters, theaters, public toilets, etc., are just artificial fires that have been ignited and fanned by the white liberals in the desperate hope that they can use this artificial revolution to fight off the real black revolution that has already swept white supremacy out of Africa, Asia, and is sweeping it out of Latin America...and is even now manifesting itself also right here among the black masses in this country.

Can we prove that the Negro revolution is controlled by white liberals? Certainly!

Right after the Birmingham demonstrations, when the entire world had seen on television screens the police dogs, police clubs, and fire hoses brutalizing defenseless black women, children, and even babies, it was reported on page twenty-six in the May 15 issue of The New York Times, that the late President Kennedy and his brother, Attorney General Robert Kennedy, during a luncheon conference with several newspaper editors from the State of Alabama, had warned these editors that they must give at least some token gains to the moderate Negro leaders in order to enhance the image of these moderate Negro leaders in the eyesight of the black masses; otherwise the masses of Negroes might turn in the direction of Negro extremists. And the late President named the Black Muslims as being foremost among the Negro extremist groups that he did not want Negroes to turn toward.

In essence, the late President told these southern editors that he was trying to build up the weak image of the Negro civil rights leaders, in order to offset the strong religious image of the Muslim leader, The Honorable Elijah Muhammad. He wasn't giving these Negro leaders anything they deserved; but he was confessing the necessity of building them up, and propping them up, in order to hold the black masses in check, keep them in his grasp, and under his control. The late President knew that once Negroes hear The Honorable Elijah Muhammad, the white liberals will never influence or control or misuse those Negroes for the benefit of the white liberals any more. So the late President was faced with a desperate situation.

Martin Luther King's image had been shattered the previous year when he failed to bring about desegregation in Albany, Georgia. The other civil rights leaders had also become fallen idols. The black masses across the country at the grass roots level had already begun to take their cases to the streets on their own. The government in Washington knew that something had to be done to get the rampaging Negroes back into the corral, back under the control of the white liberals.

The government propaganda machine began encouraging Negroes to follow only what it called "responsible" Negro leaders. The government actually meant Negro leaders who were responsible to the government, and who could therefore by controlled by the government, and be used by that same government to control their impatient people. The government knows that the Honorable Elijah Muhammad is responsible only to God and can be controlled only by God. But this white government of America doesn't believe in God!

Let us review briefly what happened last spring: In May in Birmingham, Negroes erupted and retaliated against the whites. During the many long weeks when the police dogs and police clubs and the high-pressure water hoses were brutalizing black women and children and babies, and the Birmingham Negroes had called for the government to intervene with Federal troops, the late President did nothing but sit on his hands. He said there was nothing he could do. But when Negroes in Birmingham exploded and began to defend themselves, the late President then sent in Federal troops, not to defend the Negroes, but to defend the whites against whom the Negroes had finally retaliated.

At this point, spontaneous demonstrations began taking place all over the country. At the grass roots level Negroes began to talk about marching on Washington, tying up the Congress, the Senate, the White House, and even the airport. They threatened to bring this government to a halt. This frightened the entire white power structure. The late President called in the Negro civil rights leaders and told them to bring this "march" to a halt. The Negro civil rights leaders were forced to tell the late President that they couldn't stop the march because they hadn't started it. It was spontaneous, at the grass roots level across the country, and it had no leadership whatsoever. When the late President saw that he couldn't stop the march, he joined; he endorsed it; he welcomed it; he became a part of it; and it was he who put the six Negro civil rights leaders at the head of it. It was he who made them the Big Six.

How did he do it? How did he gain control of the March on Washington? A study of his shrewd strategy will give you a glimpse of the political genius with which the Kennedy family was ruling this country from the White House, and how they used the America Negro in all of their schemes. The late President endorsed the march; that should have been the tip-off. A few days later in New York City, at the Carlysle Hotel, a philanthropic society known as the Taconic Foundation, headed by a shrewd white liberal named Stephen Currier, called a meeting of the six civil rights leaders in an effort to bring unity of action and purpose among all the civil rights groups.

After Martin Luther King had been released from his Birmingham jail cell in May, he traveled from coast to coast in fund-raising campaign for his Southern Christian Leadership Conference. Roy Wilkins then began to attack King, accusing him of stirring up trouble, saying that after the NAACP would bail out King and the other demonstrators, then King would capitalize on the trouble by taking up all the money for his own organization, leaving the NAACP to hold the bag at a great financial loss.

As King, Wilkins, and the other civil rights leaders began to fight publicly among themselves over the money they were trying to get from the white liberals, they were destroying their own leadership "image."

The white liberal, Stephen Currier, showed them how they were destroying themselves by attacks upon each other, and it was suggested that, since most of their divisions and disagreements stemmed from competition for funds from white liberals, they should unite their fund raising efforts. Then they formed the Council for the United Civil Rights Leadership, under the pretext that it would be for fund-raising purposes. They chose the Urban League's Whitney Young as the chairman, and the white liberal Stephen Currier became the co-chairman.

It took the white man to bring those Negro leaders together and to unite them into one group. He let them select their own chairman, but he himself became the co-chairman. This shrewd maneuver placed the white liberal and the Taconic Foundation in the position to exercise influence and control over the six civil rights leaders and, by working through them, to control the entire civil rights movement, including the March on Washington. (It also put the white liberals in a position to force the Big Six to come out against the recently proposed Christmas boycott by threatening to withdraw their financial support from the civil rights drive.)

According to the August 4 edition of The New York Times, $800,000 was split up between these six Negro civil rights leaders on June 19 at the Carlysle Hotel, and another $700,000 was promised to be given to them at a later date after the march was over, if everything went well with the march.

Public relations experts were made available to these "Six BIg Negroes," and they were given access to the news media throughout the country. The press skillfully projected them as the leaders of the March on Washington, and as soon as the Big Six were looked upon in the public eye as the organizers of the march, and their first step was to invite four white "leaders" to become a part of the march "godhead." This group of leaders would supposedly okay all the plans and thereby control the "direction and the mood" of the march.

These four white "leaders" represented the same factions that had put the late President in the White House: Catholics, Jews, Labor, and Protestant liberals. When the late President had learned that he couldn't stop the march, he not only joined it himself but he encouraged all of his political bedfellows to join it. This is the way the white liberals took over the March on Washington, weakened its impact, and changed its course; by changing the participants and the contents, they were able to change the very nature of the march itself.

Example: If I have a cup of coffee that is too strong for me because it is too black, I weaken it by pouring cream into it, I integrate it with cream. If I keep pouring enough cream in the coffee, pretty soon the entire flavor of he coffee is changed; the very nature of the coffee is changed. If enough cream is poured in, eventually you don't even know that I had coffee in this cup. This is what Happened with the March on Washington. The whites didn't integrate it; they infiltrated it. Whites joined it; they engulfed it; they became so much a part of it, it lost its original flavor. It ceased to be a black march; it ceased to be militant; it ceased to be angry; it ceased to be impatient. In fact, it ceased to be a march. It became a picnic, an outing with a festive, circus-like atmosphere...CLOWNS AND ALL.

The government had learned that in cases where the demonstrators are predominantly black, they are extremely militant, and ofttimes very violent. But to the same degree that whites participate, violence most times is decreased. The government knew that in cases wherein blacks were demonstrating all by themselves, those blacks are so dissatisfied, disenchanted, and angry at the white man that they will ofttimes strike back violently regardless of the odds or the consequences. The white government had learned that the only way to hold these black people in check is by joining them, by infiltrating their ranks disguised as integrationist; by integrating their marches and all their demonstrations, and weakening them: in this way only could they be held in check.

The government told the marchers what time to arrive in Washington, where to arrive, and how to arrive. The government then channeled them from the arrival point to the feet of a dead President, George Washington, and then let them march from there to the feet of another dead President, Abraham Lincoln.

The original black militants had planned to march on the White House, the Senate, and the Congress and to bring all political traffic on Capitol Hill to a halt, but the shrewd politicians in Washington, realizing that those original black militants could not be stopped, joined them. By joining the marchers, the white liberals were able to lead the marchers away from the White House, the Senate, the Congress, Capitol Hill, and away from victory. By keeping them marching from the Washington Monument to the Lincoln Monument, marching between the feet of two dead Presidents, they never reached the White House to see the then living President.

The entire march was controlled by the late president. The government in Washington had told the marchers what signs to carry, what songs to sing, what speeches to make, and what speeches not to make, and then told the marchers to be sure to get out o f town by sundown.

One of the Big Six leaders, John Lewis, chairman of the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee, was prevented from making a very militant speech. He wanted to attack the Kennedy administration for its hypocrisy o civil rights. The speech was censored by the Rt. Rev. Patrick O'Boyle, the Catholic Archbishop of Washington, D.C.. This was a case in which the Catholic Church itself, for whom Rev. O'Boyle speaks, put itself in the position of censoring the legitimate opinion of one of the Big Six Negro civil rights leaders.

The late President's shrewd strategy was: If you can't beat them, join them. The Catholic President placed his Catholic bishop in a strategic position to exercise censorship over any one of the Big Six Negro leaders who tried to deviate from the script in this great "extravaganza" called the March on Washington, which the government had controlled right from the very beginning.

So, in the final analysis of the march: It would have to be classified as the best performance of the year; in fact it was the greatest performance of this century. It topped anything that Hollywood could have produced. If we were going to give out Academy Awards in 1963, we would have to give the late President an Oscar for the "Best Producer of the Year"; and to the four white liberals who participated should get an Oscar as the "Best Actors of the Year," because they really acted like sincere liberals and fooled many Negroes. And to the six Negro civil rights leaders should go and Oscar for the "Best Supporting Cast," because they supported the late President in his entire act, and in his entire program.

Now that the show is over, the black masses are still without land, without jobs, and without homes...their Christian churches are still being bombed, their innocent little girls murdered. So what did the March on Washington accomplish? Nothing!

The late President has a bigger image as a liberal, the other whites who participated have bigger liberal images also, and the Negro civil rights leaders have now been permanently named the Big Six (because of their participation in the Big Fix?)...but the black masses are still unemployed, still starving, and still living in the slums...and, I might add, getting angrier and more explosive every day.

History must repeat itself! Because of America's evil deeds against these twenty-two million "Negroes," like Egypt and Babylon before her, America herself now stands before the "bar of justice." White America is now facing her Day of Judgment, and she can't escape because today God himself is the judge. God himself is now the administrator of justice, and God himself is to be her divine executor!

Is it possible for America to escape this divine disaster? If America can't atone for the crimes she has committed against the twenty-two million "Negroes," if she can't undo the evils she has brutally and mercilessly heaped upon our people these past four hundred years, then America has signed her own doom...and our own people would be foolish to accept her deceitful offers of integration into her doomed society at this late date!

How can America atone for her crimes? The Honorable Elijah Muhammad teaches us that a desegregated theater or lunch counter won't solve our problems. Better jobs won't even solve our problems. An integrated cup of coffee isn't sufficient pay for four hundred years of slave labor, and a better job in the white man's factory or position in his business is, at best, only a temporary solution. The only lasting or permanent solution is complete separation on some land that we can call our own.

The Honorable Elijah Muhammad teaches us that the race problem can easily be solved, just by sending these twenty-two million ex-slaves back to our own homeland where we can live in peace and harmony with our own kind. But this government should provide the transportation, plus everything else we need to get started again in our own country. This government should provide everything we need in machinery, materials, and finance; enough to last us for from twenty to twenty-five years, until we can become an independent people in our own country.

If this white government is afraid to let her twenty-two million ex-slaves go back to our country and to our own people, then America must set aside some separate territory here in the Western Hemisphere, where the two races can live apart from each ot her, since we certainly don't get along peacefully while we are here together. The size of the territory can be judged according to our own population. If our people number one-seventh of America's total population, then give us one-seventh of this land. We don't want any land in the desert, but where there is rain and much mineral wealth. We want fertile, productive land on which we can farm and provide our own people with sufficient food, clothing, and shelter. This government must supply us with the machinery and other tools needed to dig into the earth. Give us everything we need for them for from twenty to twenty-five years, until we can produce and supply our own needs.

If we are a part of America, then part of what she is worth belongs to us. We will take our share and depart, then this white country can have peace. What is her net worth? Give us our share in gold and silver and let us depart and go back to our homeland in peace. We want no integration with this wicked race that enslaved us. We want complete separation from this race of devils. But we should not be expected to leave America and go back to our homeland empty-handed. After four hundred years of slave labor, we have some back pay coming, a bill owed to us that must be collected.

If the government of White America truly repents of its sins against our people, and atones by giving us our true share, only then can America save herself! But if America waits for Almighty God himself to step in and force her into a just settlement, God will take this entire continent away from her; and she will cease to exist as a nation. Her own Christian Scriptures warn her that when God comes He can give the "entire Kingdom to whomsoever He will"...which only means that the God of Justice on Judgment Day can give this entire continent to whomsoever He wills!

White America, wake up and take heed, before it is too late!