Audio Video Web Conferencing : malcom obervance?

[Alkebulan]

wed, may 19, i'm thinkin 7:00 pm n the classes rm, f that's o k w every1.

any1 wishing a different starting time, please post ur suggestions here.

thanks every1

 

[Alkebulan]

early malcolm x

this is 1 version of a partial recounting of how malcolm gained some of his popularity n harlem. i was living n harlem when this happened &, of course, it was all over the neighborhood that nite & 4 many months 2 come.

malcolm x was minister of temple #7 at lenox ave & 116th st from 1953 - dec 1963. temple # 7 earlier known as the mohammad temple of islam & later as mohammads mosque # 7 was the most important muslim temple n amerikkka outside of the chicago headquarters & malcolm, as its spiritual leader, was elijah mohammad s most articulate deciple. n addition 2 his temple lectures, which n the early days he delivered 3/wk, malcolm wrote regular columns 4 a # of blk or blk oriented newspapers & this was widely known 2 at least a certain segment of the blk community, esp n new york. but until 1957 he was virtually unknown 2 the public at large, that is 2 white amerikkka, which pays little or no heed 2 blk activities as long as they don t spill over or threaten the white status quo.

quite a few blks had heard of malcolm x prior 2 57 but much of what they had heard was erroneus. he was known 2 b the leader of a religious group, a group that came 2 b known n harlem (at least) as 'god s angry men'. what really brought malcolm, & his organization, 2 the attention of the entire northeast part of the country was an incident that occurred n the spring of 57.

late n the evening of april 20, 1957, 3 men, 2 of whom were later identified as muslims were witnesses 2 an altercation b/t police & a man police accused of beating an unidentifed female. as the cops started working over their victim, a man named reese poe, the 3 men began 2 remonstrate w them. 'ur not n alabama', 1 of the muslims, hinton johnson, was reported 2 hv shouted out, 'this is new york'. at 1st the cops merely ordered johnson & his companions 2 move on. when they refused they were placed under arrest & taken 2 the 25th precent station house but not b4 1 of the cops, mike dolan, had hit johnson w his nightstick.

the subsequent chain of events, which is worth relating n detail 4 a # of reasons, was reported as follows by the amsterdam news:

a woman who had witnessed the incident then rushed 2 the moslem restaurant on lenox av & told the muslims that 1 of the brothers had been beaten by a policeman.

a group of moslems, led by their spiritual leader, minister malcolm x, then went 2 the station house & asked 2 c their brother. mr. x claims that the police 1st told him that they did not hv such a man n the station. but as the word passed thru harlem, the muslim crowd swelled around the station house & finally police admitted that they did hv the muslims inside.

the muslims asked 2 c their brother. mr. x was permitted 2 c hinton. he claims that hinton told him that when he had been brought n2 the station house he was suffering from the blows of the nightstick & that n his pain he fell down on his knees 2 pray. he told mr. x that when he was on his knees praying n the station house the leutenant n charge came upon him & hit him across the mouth w a nightstick & also hit him on the shins w the stick.

mr. x demanded that hinton b sent 2 a hospital 4 attention. police finally agreed & sent him 2 harlem hospital. while he was being treated there, the muslims joined by a group of nationalists & other harlemites, congregated n2 a crowd of 2,000 outside the hospital. as the crowd grew, police rose 2 the emergency & all available cops were presssed n2 duty w deputy mcgowan taking command.

then 2 the surprise of all, hinton was released from harlem hospital & taken back 2 the 28th precinct & placed n a cell. the moslems followed. they formed a solid line half a block long n front of the station house & waited 4 orders from their leaders. their dicipline amazed police & more than 1 hi ranking officer expressed growing concern.

by the time mr. x was n the station house w his attorney, charles j beavers, they arranged 4 bail 4 pots & tall (the 2 other men arrested w hinton) & then asked 2 c hinton. when attorney beavers saw hinton s condition he immediately asked that he b sent 2 the hospital, charging that he was n no condition 2 remain n jail. but police flatly refused, saying that he had already been 2 the hospital. they said hinton must remain n a cell 4 arrainment n court saturday morning.

it was 2:30 am by this time but the moslem followers were still n front of the station house. mr. x left the station house, gave 1 brief command 2 his followers, & they disappeared as f n thin air.

1 amazed policeman, on seeing this, said: "no 1 man should hv that much power" (end of amsterdam news article)


what the cop--who was later identified by the writer of the article, james hicks, as being deputy mcgowen himself--meant, of course, was no 1 black man should hv that much power. but it was that same power & presence which so impressed & frightened the police that also attracted thousands of young blks 2 malcolm. here was a man who could walk boldly n2 the jaws of the lion, walk proud & tall n2 the territory of the enemy, the station house of the 28th precinct & force the enemy 2 capitulate. here was a man who could help restore the heritage & pride of race & self dignity that had been stripped from us over the 4 hundred yrs of our enslavement here n white amerikkka. although harlem had its unique characteristics, like many other blk communities, news of this event spread (& was no doubt embelished several times over) thru the grapevine long b4 any newspaper publication. malcolm & the muslims became more than a curiosity.

it is worthwhile detailing the subsequent events of that wkend 4 what they reveal about malcolm s stubborn devotion 2 his followers & about the methods of the police n harlem (& untold others n blk communities all over).

after the crowd had dispersed, a # of muslims assembled at 4:00 am at their restaurant on lenox av 2 discuss the matter. malcolm made the decision that they would not appear en mass at hinton johnson s arraignment the following day. malcolm appeared together w the attorney, charles beavers, & another muslim, mr. john. the editor of the amsterdam news, james hicks, was also present. as hicks relates:

"here again the police irritated the muslems by attempting 2 arraign hinton w/o his lawyer being present. actually they did put him on bail while attorney beavers was n judge baers court on another case. after bail was set at $2,500, w/o hintons lawyer being present, the muslims quickly put up the bail & stood outside where they were told hinton would b delivered 2 them. but, instead of hinton being delivered 2 them he was turned loose n the building 2 find his way out alone.

he came out of the jail staggering, bleeding & alone, which enraged the muslems. they then rushed him 2 dr. leona turner, n long island. she took 1 look at him & ordered him 2 the hospital at once. back sped the car acros the island 2 manhattan & hinton was finally admitted 2 sydenham. there it was found that he had a clot on the brain, that he was bleeding internally. hospital authorities gave him a 50 50 chance of survival.

as he battled 4 his life, the moslems gathered again sunday. this time n daylight n the square opposite sydenham hospital. they marched around the square protesting & police soon discovered they had been joined by moslems from boston, hartford, baltimore, washington & wilmington. thought they were stern n their protest they were as orderly as a battalion of marines.

w the crowd growing around the hospital the moslems were joined by some teenagers carrying zip guns. as soon as this was learned mr. x once more dismissed his followers & sent them home. he stated that it was not their intention 2 start any violence. monday, as hintons life hung n the balance reports spread thru harlem that f hinton died there would b a riot n harlem monday nite. police prepared 4 the worst. hi police officials arranged 2 meet w malcolm at an uptown location.

at that meeting he openly stated that his followers were ready 2 die when mistreated. but he insisted that they were not looking 4 trouble. "we do not look 4 trouble", he told police officials. "n fact we r taught 2 steer clear of trouble. we do not carry guns or knives. but we r also taught that when 1 finds something that is worthwhile getting n2 trouble about, he should b ready 2 die then & there 4 that particular thing" at the meeting it was brought out that the moslems hv a wittness, harry boffins, who is prepared 2 testify that an officer wearing shield # 2775 said n front of harlem hospital friday nite, "i d hv shot the (nsert n word) but the other cops kept getting n the way". the wittness will also testify that an officer pointed at mr. x & said: "we should break that bastards head b/c he is their leader".

1 of the things that added 2 the tension friday nite was that all of the officers involved n the lenox av fracas were white." (end of hicks comments)

 

[MzBlkAngel]

thank you so much for sharing.....

May 19, at 7:00 pm EST in the class room

HOPE TO SEE YALL THERE.....

Alkebulan

 

[Alkebulan]

n november 1960, malcolm x(x) & bayard rustin(br) met at radio station wrai n nyc 2 discuss their approaches 2 the ? of race n the us. at the time, br, 48, was a close advisor to a. philip tandolph & dr. martin luther king, jr., who represented 2 generations of nonviolent leadership n the struggle 4 an integrated, non-racial society. x, 35, was the most charismatic disciple of elijah muhammed, spiritual head of the noi. this meeting, 1 of several historic ones b/t the 2 men is significant. 1st, it clearly delineates the tactics & objectives of the integrationists & the separatists. 2md it occurred at the moment when the civil rights movement was poised 2 capture the full attention of the nation. 3rd, it reflects the tradition of engaging 1's opponents n reasoned, thoughtful debate - an approach other leaders were reluctant to follow n x's case. finally, it poses a ? still relevant 2day: can the us fulfill the promise of its founding documents & bcome a truly pluralistic society or will various minorities b tempted 2 pursue a separatist agenda? a tape of the discussion was provided 2 me from a friend. the program host began by asking the 2 men 2 "tell us about ur organization & what it stands 4."

X: n the past 2 yrs, the hon. elijah muhammad has become the most talked ahout blk man n amerikkka b/c he is having such miraculous success n getting his program over among the so-called negro masses. time magazine last year [1959] wrote that he has eliminated from among his followers alcohol, dope addiction, profanity-all of which stems from disrespect of self. he has successfully eliminated stealing & crime among his followers. time also pointed out that he has eliminated adultery & fornication, & prostitution, making blk men respect their women, something that has been characteristically absent among our men. time also pointed out that muslims, followers of elijah muhammad, hv eliminated juvenile delinquency.

when u think about it, time was giving mr. muhammad credit 4 being 1 of the greatest moral reformers that has appeared among the so-called negroes yet. a few months later, us news & world report pointed out that mr. muhammad was successful n stressing the importance of economics. the point behind his program, farms 2 feed our people, factories 2 manufacture goods 4 ourselves, businesses 2 create jobs 4 ourselves, is 2 b economically independent rather than sit around waiting 4 the yt man 2 give us jobs.

what the hon. elijah muhammad has been teaching is not what we hv been accused of: nationalism. nationalism is the political approach to the problems that r confronting the so-called negro n us. the aim of the blk nationalist is the same as the aim of the muslim. we r pointing toward the same goal. the difference is n method. we say the only solution is the religious approach; this is y stress the importance of a moral reformation. i would like to stress that mr. muhammad is not a politician. he does not believe polities is the solution to the so- called negro's problem. it will take god. god will hv 2 hv a hand n it, b/c the problem of the so-called negro is different from the problems of any other blk people anywhere on this earth since the beginning of time. every condition of the so-called negro was pre-ordained & prophesied. we believe that we r living n the fulfillment of that prophecy 2day. we believe that our history n america, our experiences at the hands of slave masters, is n line w biblical prophecy. we believe that mr. muhammad's presence among so-called negroes here n america is n line w biblical prophecies.

host: does this involve the creation of a separate state?

x: it involves the creation of a blk state for the blk man f not n america then somewhere on this earth. f not abroad, then here n america. primarily it involves acquiring some land that the blk man can call his own. f the powers that b don't want it here, then they should make it possible for us to do it somewhere else.

host: it does involve politics, then.

x: any religion that does not take n2 consideration the freedom & the rights of the blk man is the wrong religion. politics as such is not the solution. the divine solution would hv 2 hv that ingredient in it. u can call it politics f u want, but the overall problem of the so-called negro n amerikkka is not a political problem as such, it is an economic problem, a social problem, a mental problem, & a spiritual problem. only god can solve the whole problem.

rustin: i am very happy 2 b here & i think malcolm can clarify some of the ? s he has brought up n my mind. i believe the great majority of the negro people, blk people, r not seeking anything from anyone. they r seeking 2 become full-fledged citizens. their ancestors hv toiled n this country, contributing greatly to it. the us belongs 2 no particular people, & n my view the great majority of negroes & their leaders take integration as their key word-which means that rightly or wrongly they seek 2 become an integral part of the us. we hv, i believe, much work yet to do, both politically & through the courts, but i believe we hv reached the point where most negroes, from a sense of dignity & pride, hv organized themselves 2 demand 2 become an integral part of all the institutions of the us. we r doing things by direct action which we feel will further this cause. we believe that justice for all people, including negroes, can b achieved.

this is not a unique position, & while a controversial 1 it is certainly not as controversial as the 1 x supports. therefore i would like 2 ask him this ?: the logic of ur position is 2 say 2 blk people n this country: we have 2 migrate & set up some state n africa. it seems 2 me that this is where u hv to come out.

x: well, mr. r, let me say this about full-fledged or as they say first-class citizenship. most of the so-called negro leaders hv got the negro masses used 2 thinking n terms of 2nd-class citizenship, of which there is no such thing. we who follow the hon. elijah muhammad believe that a man is either a citizen or he is not a citizen. he is not a citizen by degree. f the black man n us is not recognized as a 1st-class citizen, we don't feel that he is a citizen at all. people come here from hungary & r integrated n2 the us way of life overnight, they r not put n2 any 4th class or 3rd class or any kind of class. only 1 who is put n this category is the so-called negro who is forced 2 beg the yt man 2 accept him. we feel that f 100 yrs after the so-called emancipation proclamation the blk man is still not free, then we don't feel that what lincoln did set them free n the 1st place.

r: this is all well and good but u r not answering my ?.

x: i am answering ur ?. the blk man n us, once he gets his so-called freedom is still 9,000 miles away from that which he can call home. his problem is different from that of others who r striving 4 freedom. n other countries they r the majority & the oppressor is the minority. here, the oppressor is the majority. the yt man can just let you sit down. he can find someone else 2 run his factories.

so we don't think the passive approach can work here. we don't c that any1 other than the so-called negro was encouraged 2 seek freedom this way. the liberals tell the so-called negro 2 use the passive approach & turn the other cheek, but they hv never told yts who were n bondage 2 use the passive approach. they don't tell the yts n eastern europe who r under the russian yoke 2 b passive n their resistance. they giv them guns & make heroes out of them & call them freedom fighters. but f a blk man becomes militant n his striving against oppression then immediately he is classified as a fanatic.

the yt man is posing as the leader of the so-called free world, & the only way he can b accepted as the leader of the so-called free world is 2b accepted by the majority of the people on this earth, the majority of whom r not yt people. they measure him by the way he treats the nonyt people here. this integration talk is hypocrisy, meant to impress our brothers n africa or asia.

r: then what u r saying is that u r opposed 2 integration b/c it is not meaningful & can't work. f u believe that integration is not possible, then the logic of ur position should b that u r seeking 2 find a piece of territory & go to it. either u r advocating the continuation of slavery, since u feel we cannot get integration by the methods that I advocate-which is 2 say the slow, grinding process of integration - or u r proposing separation.

x: we believe integration is hypocrisy. f the government has 2 pass laws 2 let us n2 their education system, f they hv 2 pass laws 2 get the yt man 2 accept us n better housing n their neighborhoods, that is the equivalent of holding a gun to their head, & that is hypocrisy. f the yt man were to accept us, w/o laws being passed, then we would go 4 it.

r: do u think that is going to happen?

X: well, ur common sense tells u, sir, that it's not going to happen.

r: but f u cannot do it through the constitutional method, & u cannot do it through brotherhood, then what do u c as the future of blk people here & why should they stay?

X: as any intelligent person can c, the yt man is not going 2 share his wealth w his ex-slaves. but god has taught us that the only solution 4 the ex-slave & the slave master is separation.

r: then u do believe n separation.

X: we absolutely do believe n separation.

r: well, r u being logical by saying, "let's take over a territory, a part of the us" or r u saying, let's go outside?

X: i think both r logical. the land could be anywhere. when the hon. em teaches us that we hv 2 hv some land of our own, it means just that, that we have 2 hv some land of our own. now f the master's intention is good, since we have been faithful workers, i should say faithful servants, all these yrs, then it seems he should giv us some of these states.

r: all right, now it is clear that u r advocating separation.

X: separation not integration.

r: all right, now that is clear we can put that out of the way & move on to other things. isn't there an inconsistency n ur economic position? where r they going 2 move to? when moses took his people n2 the desert, he had a pretty clear idea of where he was going.

X: well, mentioning moses is just right. the people that moses was leading were probably the closest parallel to the problems confronting the so-called negro. moses' people were slaves n a land that was not theirs. moses' people had a slave mentality, they were worshipping a god that was not their own. the negro in us is the same way, he worships the yt man's god, & he is following the yt man's religion. they r n the same fix-socially, mentally, politically, spiritually-as the people whom moses grew up amongst, 4,000 years ago. f u'll recall, moses didn't advocate integration. moses advocated separation. nowhere n the bible will u find that moses told his people to integrate themselves w pharaoh. His 1 doctrine was: let my people go. that meant separate, not seek integration n the house of bondage. it did not mean to seek the acceptance of the slave master. he said: f u follow me, i will lead u 2 a land flowing w milk and honey. he never told any1 where that land was. he never told the people where he was taking them, or what they would have to go through. f u go back 2 that time u will c that some of them believed n him but many were afraid of the slave master. they didn't believe they could get along w/o Pharaoh. they didn't believe anybody would giv them a job f pharaoh didn't. they didn't believe they could hv an economic system free of pharaoh. remember, pharaoh himself never opposed moses. he always got magicians to oppose moses. today the modern slave master gets a lot of so-called negro politicians to oppose elijah muhammad & work a lot of magic to make the so-called negroes think he is a crazy man, just as pharaoh had magicians to make the hebrews think moses was some kind of crazy man.

but now let me say this: we feel the Hon em is a modern moses!

some people say adam clayton powell is a modern moses & some say mlk is a modern moses, but no 1 can claim 2b a modern moses until he finds out what the 1st moses did. moses never advocated integration. He advocated complete separation. he didn't advocate passive resistance, he advocated an eye 4 an eye & a tooth 4 a tooth. love ur enemy: as long as u teach a man that kind of philosophy, he'll remain a slave.

r: well, i am a great advocate of nonviolence, but i think all this talk about whether 2 integrate or not, & getting involved n the economic life of this country might b more interesting to me f i knew where u wanted to lead people. but i don't know where u want 2 go. i don't think u do, either.

X: yes we do. we can take some land right here, sir.

r: yes, but f u do not believe n integration, & they don't love u, do u think they r going 2 giv u 10 or 12 states?

X: ah, mr. rustin: the predicament that a man is n is what makes him reach certain decisions. us is n the worst predicament of any country n the history of the world.

Rustin: i agree...

X: now what is causing this predicament? the race problem. us's #1 problem is the so-called negro. what must we do? what must i do about this negro problem? & whenever us is attacked on the race problem, what can she say?

rustin: she can say a lot.

X: what?

r: i'll tell u what. i hv spent 25 yrs of my life on the race ?, & i hv been 22 times to jail. america can say that until 54, negroes could not go to school w yts. now they can. negroes could not join trade unions, but now they can. i do not say any of this is perfect, but it is enough 4 us 2b able 2 answer russia & china & the rest on the race question &, more important, it is enough 2 keep the great majority of negroes feeling that things can improve here. until u hv some place to go to, they r going to want to stay here.

now, i want 2 stop right here & get something clear. n muhammad's mind, this may b a religious matter, but n the minds of his followers the muslim movement is a psychological & political concept. they do not read the koran, they read the bible. they r essentially, culturally, christian, not muslims. y therefore do they call themselves muslims? b/c they do not want 2 use the same religious terminology that their masters used.

most negroes who were brought 2 us came from the west coast of africa, long before the spread of islam to that part of africa...

X: that is what the yt man taught u...after stripping u of ur original culture. now consider the mali empire -this shows the influence of the muslim religion n west africa b4 the discovery of us.

r: i am not putting down the culture of west africa, i am just saying that the islamic influence came later. all over west africa u will find wonderful sculptures which were the sources 4 much 20th century european art, notably picasso & cubism. now these figures could not hv been made f the influence of islam had prevailed, be-cause, as u ought to know, muslims r not allowed to create figures n their art objects.

X: let me quote from the times last sunday. it says that islam is spreading like wildfire n nigeria & christianity is only skin-deep.

?: does progress involve a greater sense of racial identity?

r: i believe it is very important to hv a great sense of racial identity b/c I believe it is quite impossible 4 people 2 struggle creatively f they do not truly believe n themselves. i believe that dignity is 1st. this 4 me is doubly important because believing n integration & not being told where we are 2 go, i can c nothing more logical than staying here & struggling 4 1's rights. also b/c of moral principles-but leave them aside 4 the moment-i can c no way 4 the negro to struggle except through non-violence & a dedication to a strategic non-violence as a matter of principle. now therefore f u r going to struggle w non-violence 2 a certain extent u r going 2 hv a certain affection 4 the people who are mistreating u. now affection 4 the other fellow is not possible w/o a great sense of dignity of oneself & there4 the dignity of the negro 4 me is not something that is an aside. it is an essential of the struggle. the people n montgomery were able to struggle & get integration on their buses 4 a simple reason: 10 yrs b4 they could not hv done it b/c they did not believe n themselves. when they believed n themselves they could b socially affectionate to the opposition while at the same time they could be extremely militant & walking & being prepared to sacrifice, i think this is most important & i would therefore agree w X that doing away w the ugliness resulting from poverty & their position n society is very necessary & important. we can certainly agree here.

now let me ask u another ? b/c i want to clarify ur position on the jewish ?. where do u & ur group come out on this ? i've been given to understand that ur position is -particularly n harlem- that 1 of the reasons that negroes r so oppressed is that the jews r exploiting them & that the jews r attempting 2 exploit the arab world & stir up difficulties n the middle east. i'd like 2 know f this is a misunderstanding i hv.

X: f u hv read what the hon em has written & he has written much, i don't think u can find an article where he has ever pointed out the jew as an exploiter of the black man, he speaks of the exploiter. period.. he doesn't break it down n terms of french or englishmen or jew or german, he speaks of the exploiter & sometimes the man who is the most guilty of exploitation will think u r pointing the finger at him & put out the propaganda that u're anti-this or anti-that, we make no distinction b/t exploitation & exploiter.

r: what do u mean that the man who is the most exploited will put out propaganda?

X: i say this that when a man puts out propaganda against muslims usu that man feels that the finger is being pointed at him but-

r: n other words,u feel that many jews feel that way.

X: i don't know. but i say that u cannot find anything that the hon., em has written or said that at anytime will label the jew as an exploiter. , no sir, but he speaks about the exploitation & oppression & the deception that has been used against the blk people n us., now the man that is guilty (let) whoever is guilty wear that shoe., but he has never made that distinction b/t a frenchman - & again- or a jew or a german. an exploiter is an exploiter, i don't care what kind of label u put on him-u can't duck it.

an observation: as opposed 2 traditional pan africanism, malcolm had a different conception of the role of afrika n the pan afrikan scheme. historically, the idea was that new world intellectuals, new world blks had a responsibility 2 participate n the redemption of afrika, the ousting of imperialism n afrika. certainly malcolm identified w that, but malcolm also felt n response 2 the tremendous upsurge of national liberation on the continent itself that afrika was now n a position 2b a crucial positive force n the liberation of afroamerikkkans. so the center of gravity of the panafrikanist struggle ****ed 2 afrika w malcolm which is just a reflection of post wwII reality 1st glimpsed n 1945 at the manchester (england) pan afrikan conference & he developed a political theory which places afrika @ the center of afroamerikkka s redemption.


may 19, 1987, nyc, harlem, something quite important occurred n new york city that day. lenox boulevard was officially renamed malcolm x boulevard, becomming the 1st city n the world to name a street after malcolm x. it was a serious struggle & a major coalition of blk s, from street gangs to blk professors came 2gether 2 force political recognition. it was a major victory given the fact that malcolm represents something about the blk community that stands n tension w the rest of the political culture of this country & 2 name that street, a major thouroughfare, after malcolm will b a gr8 inspiration 4 generations 2 come & hopefully may lead 2 greater struggle & a meaningful carrying 4ward of his legacy. it is all the more impressive b/c lenox boulevard, hereafter respectfully referred 2 as malcolm x boulevard intersects directly w adam clayton powell blvd, & these 2 streets r major avenues in the harlem community.

i was n discussion w some1 & the mention of the street named after adam clayton powell entered n. this person inquired as 2 whether that name still stood, as i had been away from nyc 4 some time. i assured that person that, given the struggle that transpired @ that time 2 rename the street, any change that was imposed on the harlem community, & it would hv 2 come from outside harlem, would probably b met w fierce, violent resistance & would prob result n a riot the scope of which had not been seen since the assassination of mlk. yesterday, i received an invitation to attend a conference commenorating malcolm x in nyc. the event is occurring on the corner of malcolm x blvd & adam clayton powell blvd. i suggest that this is 1 of the most historically rich interesections, 4 our people, on the planet.


:shades:

 

[Alkebulan]

tony brown interview

tony: 1yr b4 malcolm x was gunned down feb 21, 65, he accused elijah mohammed of sexual liasons w multiple teenage girls. farrakan (louis x at that time) called malcolm x a traitor. farrakan wrote: "the die is set & malcolm shall not escape. esp after such evil, foolish talk about his benefactor, the honorable elijah muhammad, n trying 2 rob him of the divine glory which allah had bestowed upon him. such a man is worthy of death, & it would hv been so were it not 4 muhammads confidence that god would give him the victory over the enemies"

malcolm did not escape, his home was firebombed 2 wks later & 1 wk after that on feb 21, 65 a group of black men heavily armed, murdered him at the audobon ballroom. (photo montage shown at this time). 3 black men w ties 2 the nj mosque were connected 2 the murder. mujahid abdul halim (while still n prison) spoke 2 tony brown: that morning we had decided 2 move on malcolm & kill him f we possibly could. the stragtegy was 2 establish that there would b no searching, upon approaching, it was determined that there was no search. no one recognized us, as we were all from out of town, we took our places, some sat on the left hand side on the front. there was a 45, a lugar & a sawed off shotgun. the plan was 2 fire the shotgun shortly after he came out & began his speach.

farakkan has steadfastly denied that he payed any direct role n the murder. he has admitted that his words did play a sig role. when did he admit that his words may hv killed malcolm & do his words admit culpability? according 2 press reports miss shabazz claims that he admitted culpability. he said 2 barbara walters on 20 20 that his words helped create the atmosphere that permitted the murder of malcolm x. from an 85 interview w tony: Q: do u feel that ur criticism of malcolm contributted 2 his assasination? A: the climate created by malcolm's revalation about elijah 2 the press created an equal & opp reaction & i believe my words & others were like fuel on a fire. farr called the 60 min interview w mike wallace, pretty vicious & claimed mike wallace tried 2 implicate him n malcolms death. Q: did u apologize 2 betty shabazz? A: i sat next to betty at upstate albany & afterwards she told me what she had on her mind. i could not speak back to betty, she was very angry, naturally. this was the 1st time she spoke to anyone connected 2 the malcolm murder. i took every word that she said, & she was blessing me out, b/c thats the only way i felt that the healing could begin.

n 1993 farr boasted: & f we dealt w him like a nation deals w a traitor, what the hell business is it of urs? (thats a quote). it was farr outspokeness that has pushed him n2 the national spotlight. his views on other issues from previous tony interviews: jesse jacksons reaction 2 his remarks about jews, no 1 wants 2 come 2 national attention w that kind of notoriety. i felt that the notoriety that came 2 me was a direct result of an effort by those concerned w destroying the candacy of jackson, n the end he felt that jackson benefitted & i did also. farr then discusses jackson s remarks about him, when he was repudiated by jackson & the reasons why. on the hitler remark: i ve always spoken my mind & i don t intend 2 stop now. i m not familiar w the way polititions do things & i was talking 2 my own congregation & was reacting 2 a remark that the jews had made comparing me 2 hitler. he claims that his words were n answer 2 a ?, would u say that hitler was great? he answered that yes, hitler was great but wickedly great, but the next morning the headlines read, jackson pal says hitler great. when any fool could understand what i said.

on the dirty religion remark: i said that state called isreal has not had peace n 40 yrs & won t hv peace b/c there can b no peace structured on lies, injustice, theivery & murder, useing gods name 2 shield their dirty religion n his name. the headlines read, farrakan reveals judism a gutter religion. farr says he was not condemming the religion, but the practice & the injustice they ve done 2 the palastiniens.

on the milton coleman affair: (wash post reporter) i said that i felt that coleman had violated journalistic tennents b/c the remark was off the record (hymies & ny as a hymietown), farr feels that the reporter delivered up jackson 2 the jewish community.

andrew young speaking 2 jewish leaders: young s comment: the hostility b/t blacks jews is via the voices of demagogs such as farr which do not represent the masses of black people & r insulting 2 both. farrakans comment: mr. young was booed at the convention along w corretta scott king, he has no connection w the masses of blacks. i want 2 break up that relationship b/t blacks & jews b/c no intellegent sane person wants it 2 contine. landlord/tennent, merchent/ consumer, agent/manager, manufacture/distributor & n all of these reslationships the jews hv always come out on top & the black being subservient.

how did u view malcolm x: i luved malcolm very very much. he was like a friend, brother & father 2 me. all my basic training n islam came from malcolm, he was a source of inspiration. n 64 when malcolm learned about elijah domestic situation, this hurt malcolm. malcom was incensed b/c some of the secretaries had been put out of the house, i choose 2 follow elijah & was angry w malcolm & choose 2 write against him. 2 c these writers n the villiage voice extol malcolm when they hated him when he was alive.


'people r always speculating about y am i as i am. 2 understand any person his life from birth must b reviewed. all experiences fuse n2 our personality everything that ever happened 2 us is an ingredient'

i don t think any1 has pointed out the past & current injustices of amerikkkan society n relation 2 its inhaitants of african descent as trenchantly & as truthfully as malcolm, whether he was speaking 2 yts at harvard or 2 blks on the streets of harlem. the force & veracity of his language compelled ppl 2 listen 2 him. nothing was more important 2 malcolm than telling the truth.