Thursday, July 08, 2010

Minister King Samir Shabazz Revisited

Samir ShabazzUnless you’re a political junkie, a student of far-left black liberation movements, or a resident of inner-city Philadelphia, the name Minister King Samir Shabazz probably doesn’t ring any bells. Minister Shabazz is the dude with the ’tude pictured at right, and functions as the leader of the Philadelphia chapter of the New Black Panther Party.

The Minister King is not fond of us honkies. “I’m about the total destruction of white people,” he said once. “I’m about the total liberation of black people. I hate white people. I hate my enemy…”

But he’s no fan of Barack Hussein Obama, either: “He’s a puppet on a string. I don’t support no black man running for white politics. I will not vote for who will be the next slavemaster.”

Does all this mean that Minister Shabazz is a racist? Not at all! As I wrote back in 2008, not long before Barack Hussein Obama was elected president:

No. He can’t possibly be one, because he’s a member of a historically oppressed group, and only members of the privileged elite oppressive majority can be racists. If his organization succeeds in its goal and destroys white people, leaving the surviving remnant a minority in the land, perhaps then his program would become “racist”.

But don’t bet on it. I expect that there would have to be a waiting period of several thousand years to make up for their past transgressions before white people could ever claim victim status in Minister Shabazz’ brave new world.

Samir Shabazz resurfaced a few weeks later when he and some of his comrades stationed themselves at a Philadelphia polling place to keep the crackers in line. To refresh your memory, here’s the infamous news video of what happened on election day in Philly:


This sort of racial intimidation would have been a hate crime if a white person had perpetrated it, but in Modern Multicultural America, such rules don’t apply to other races. And, true to form, the Justice Department under the new Obama administration dropped any complaint against the Polling Place Mau-Maus of Philly.

The issue lay dormant until recently, when a Justice Department attorney named J. Christian Adams quit in disgust over his agency’s blatantly political decision to abandon any civil rights case against the three intimidators. During the last few days he has been testifying before the US Civil Rights Commission, and as a result the New Black Panther Party is back in the news. According to Fox:
- - - - - - - - -
In emotional and personal testimony, an ex-Justice official who quit over the handling of a voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party accused his former employer of instructing attorneys in the civil rights division to ignore cases that involve black defendants and white victims.

J. Christian Adams, testifying Tuesday before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, said that “over and over and over again,” the department showed “hostility” toward those cases. He described the Black Panther case as one example of that — he defended the legitimacy of the suit and said his “blood boiled” when he heard a Justice official claim the case wasn’t solid.

“It is false,” Adams said of the claim.

“We abetted wrongdoing and abandoned law-abiding citizens,” he later testified.

The department abandoned the New Black Panther case last year. It stemmed from an incident on Election Day in 2008 in Philadelphia, where members of the party were videotaped in front of a polling place, dressed in military-style uniforms and allegedly hurling racial slurs while one brandished a night stick.

As usual, insults directed at white people never, ever count as “racial slurs” in the eyes of the law:

In a statement Tuesday, a Justice spokesman said the civil rights division determined “the facts and the law did not support pursuing claims” against the two other defendants and denied Adams’ allegations.

“The department makes enforcement decisions based on the merits, not the race, gender or ethnicity of any party involved. We are committed to comprehensive and vigorous enforcement of both the civil and criminal provisions of the federal laws that prohibit voter intimidation,” the spokesman said.

The Civil Rights Commission, which subpoenaed Adams, has been probing the incident since last year. Adams said he ignored department directives not to testify and eventually quit after he heard Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez testify that there were concerns the Black Panther case was not supported by the facts.

Adams has described the case as open-and-shut and said Tuesday that it was a “very low moment” to hear Perez make that claim.

But he described the department’s hostility toward that and other cases involving black defendants as “pervasive.” Adams cited hostility in the department toward a 2007 voting rights case against a black official in Mississippi who was accused of trying to intimidate voters. Adams said that when the Black Panther case came up, he heard officials in the department say it was “no big deal” and “media-generated” and point to “Fox News” as the source.

Aha! It was reported on Fox News! That’s how we know it’s a figment of the wingnuts’ imagination. No intimidation took place in Philly. That nightstick was just an umbrella or something. Inclement weather that day in Philadelphia.

An editorial in Investor’s Business Daily has more to say:

In February, on the occasion of Black History Month, Attorney General Eric Holder called the United States a “nation of cowards” regarding discussions of race even as his department was failing to prosecute one of the clearest cases of voter intimidation in American history because the defendants were black militants, members of the New Black Panther Party.

Holder said that “we, average Americans, simply do not talk enough with each other about things racial.” Okay, let’s talk, starting with Tuesday’s testimony of J. Christian Adams, a former career DOJ attorney in the Voting Rights Section. Adams resigned over DOJ’s handling of the Black Panther case and DOJ’s refusal to honor Civil Rights Commission subpoenas, including ordering Adams not to comply.

On Election Day 2008, New Black Panther party members King Samir Shabazz, Malik Zulu Shabazz and Jerry Jackson engaged in activities that resulted in charges in a civil complaint of violating the Voting Rights Act through intimidation, threats and coercion, as they stood dressed in military garb outside a Philadelphia polling place.

Wait a minute — were there two Shabazzes involved in this incident? Yes indeed: besides Samir, Malik Zulu Shabazz was there at the polling station to put whitey in his place. Malik Zulu is actually more famous than Samir, but I couldn’t find any evidence that they are related to one another. Perhaps they simply decided to share the same potent surname de guerre.

Mr. Adams testified to the deliberate and direct interference of his bosses, which prevented anything resembling a fair inquiry:

The video of the event, photos and witness testimony presented an open-and-shut case ripe for DOJ prosecution. The Justice Department under President George W. Bush filed criminal charges against the three men. Holder’s Justice Department would later drop the charges in a plea deal in which the baton-brandishing thugs promised not to do it again in Philadelphia until 2012. They walked, free to intimidate elsewhere.

On Tuesday, Adams gave the testimony his bosses tried to block, telling the Civil Rights Commission how Holder’s department refused to prosecute what he has called “the clearest case of voter intimidation that I’ve seen since practicing law.”

At an April 23 Commission hearing, witnesses testified to how the Black Panthers acted in concert, threatening black Republicans and whites who showed up. Two witnesses testified that they saw some would-be voters turn back and leave without voting after seeing the nightstick and being called “white devils.”

Yet Thomas Perez, assistant attorney general for civil rights, testified before the commission in April that “the facts did not constitute a prosecutable violation of the federal criminal civil rights statutes.” Say what?

“After reviewing the evidence, the department concluded that there was insufficient evidence to establish that the party or Malik Zulu Shabazz violated Section 11(b),” Perez said in his testimony.

So the Shabazzes got off, and are free to continue to run their patch of Philly as their own personal fiefdom. It’s business as usual with the Obama administration. After all, politics in Philly isn’t all that different from politics in Chicago, and now, thanks to the One, the same style of Hope and Change prevails in Washington D.C.

IBD nails it:

Now imagine if this had been Tea Party members outside a polling place in Philadelphia, Miss. Would those in Holder’s department have turned their heads and said there was nothing to see here, just move along? We think the outcome and the media coverage would have been different.

It certainly would have been different. And it all makes sense, once you learn the simple rule: only white people can be racists.

15 comments:

Zenster said...

Pity Black America when the pendulum swings back the other way. It will not be pretty.

It is not just White America that has gotten fed up with a small percentage of the overall population being responsible for such a disproportionate amount of crime and, most importantly, violent crimes like murder, assault and forcible rape.

Asians, Hispanics and other segments of the American voting public have had more than their fill of this cretinous behavior and once such sheltering constructs as Affirmative Action and Hate Speech laws get stripped away, it's a hard rain that's going to fall on these very same Black individuals.

Now, think about just how much harder that rain's going to be due to the numbers of these Black thugs that are so readily converting over to Islam. Combine this with BHO plus AG Holder's abject betrayal of America to Islamic terrorists and a major double whammy is waiting in the wings for Black America.

Then, toss in race baiting wanna be warlord pimps like Al Sharpton along with Black Liberation Theology bigots such as Reverend Jeremiah Wright. This time around, when the payback arrives, there will be no one for Black America to blame but themselves.

My heart pumps piss.

christian soldier said...

Thanks Z - you have taken the words 'right out of my mouth' so- I do not have to write anything else!
Well stated-by the way---
carol-CS

Zenster said...

You are welcome, CS. This isn't anything that I'm particularly looking forward to but, likewise, it won't keep me awake during the long winter nights. I'll admit that, should the time come, it'll be difficult not to point and laugh.

More than anything, there is a glaring parallel between Islam and Black America:

THEY BOTH SHOULD BE POLICING THEMSELVES.

No one can do it better or more effectively than the populations in question. Just as Muslims know exactly who among them is the most radical, rarely is it that a Black community doesn't have a damn good idea of who it is selling the crack and fencing the stolen goods.

Too bad it's probably going to take a lot of genuine misery and suffering by both parties before they purchase the proverbial clue.

Takuan Seiyo said...

I recommend a visit to Samir Shabazz’s web page and to a recording of his approach to beautiful diversity :"You want freedom, you going to kill some crackers, you going to kill some of their babies.”

Fjordman said...

Liberal Jews are not the main force behind this, contrary to what Kevin MacDonald and his ilk claim, but it is true that there is an aggressive and deliberate campaign in all Western countries to displace and destroy the white majority population. Only one civilization on this planet is currently waging a relentless demographic and cultural war against its own people: the West.

Knowing exactly why white Gentile elites want to dismantle and dispossess their own people is of secondary importance, but that does not mean that it is of no importance at all. Understanding the thinking and goals of your enemies is always useful. What do they want to achieve by this? Do they want to break down whites because we are perceived as being too unruly and thus a potential threat to an international, authoritarian New World Order? Are we considered potential rivals to the ruling oligarchs, who want to create a permanent caste system with themselves on top? Do they want to turn the entire world into one giant shopping mall, starting with the West? Or are they Marxists who desire a "Final Solution to the Capitalist Problem" by eradicating whites? Is it all of the above, or are there other reasons? How do we stop them? Should we have a Nuremberg Trial against the anti-whites after the fall of Multiculturalism?

admin_nds said...

As a Jewish person, I understand the suspicion of liberal Jews. Jews are at the top of the abortion industry leadership, and the top of the radical homosexual leadership. Unfortunately, they also support multiculturalism. In Jewish circles, the idea of living in a completely mixed society is desirable. The more mixed and permissive, the less danger of being singled out as the foreign "Other".

It's all about looking for the comfort zone. It's sophistry, but the thinking avers something like this: If the society is so mixed and disorganized, then nationalist or racial movements are impossible, and therefore Jews are safe.

To which I ask, "What about Islam?" and the Rabbi looks at me blankly and says "Well, that's a whole other problem, isn't it."

In effect, Jews know that Marxist trends such as multiculturalism and radical sexual politics are now coming back to bite them. Still, many of us are afraid, and leftist ideals still have strong appeal. The rest of us (about 20%) are all Reagan Republicans. It's getting better, slowly.

Fjordman said...

Admin_nds: In cases where Jewish Leftist negative influence is real, not imagined, I would single out the strong anti-white bias of Hollywood - and by "white" I mean European Christian - and the idea that race is "socially constructed" and that genes do not have an impact on culture and society. Think Franz Boas, Stephen Jay Gould and Jared Diamond. It is not a conspiracy theory that Diamond's bestseller Guns, Germs, and Steel provided a pseudo-scientific basis for the ongoing global dispossession of whites. But at the same time, he did not create this problem.

Generally speaking, Jews have been well treated in the USA. Nearly all groups of recent immigrants are more anti-Jewish than the white northern European Gentiles. By implication, this means that Jewish groups who support Third World mass immigration to the USA and the West are alienating their friends and importing enemies. In short, they are actively creating future pogroms. Creating new enemies is not a smart strategy for any nation, but especially not for a small and demographically vulnerable group. Even my limited Gentile brain can grasp this fact. I'm still waiting for the famously high Jewish IQ to kick in and see how absurd this strategy is.

That being said, all things considered I think Jewish influence is often overrated, ironically by both the anti-Semites and the philo-Semites. Sometimes when you read people hailing Jewish scientific achievements you get the impression that Europe before the Jews was only inhabited by grunting cavemen without a single redeeming quality of their own. The truth is almost the opposite: Europeans had high IQs before any Jew set foot on that continent. Jews probably did not have high IQs before they came to Europe.

The Scientific and Industrial Revolutions were created by Europeans with practically zero direct Jewish contributions. Jews have made many impressive contributions for their small number, yes, but only in the post-Enlightenment environment after European Christians had invented all the organizational and mental structures of modern science. Jews might not have been able to make the same transition because of their greater hostility to secular learning and secular laws compared to Christians. Jews never dominated the sciences at any point, they were simply a disproportionate minority. The same principle applies to their negative contributions as well.

The bottom line is that while most Western achievements would have existed without Jews, so most Western problems that we see today would have existed without Jews. Whites should take credit for our successes as well as our mistakes.

filthykafir said...

@ admin nds
Thanks for your post. It clears up some things for me -- about why Jews, who are otherwise remarkably intelligent as a group, look to be so foolishly (and suicidally) liberal -- that heretofore simply didn't make sense. Now they do.

I can relate; I might act the same way in similar circumstances.

NorseAlchemist said...

Eric Holder said we are a nation of cowards when it comes to discussing Race, and I think he's right, but not for the reasons he thinks he's right.

White people can't discuss race today, because any mention of Blacks or another minority in a negative (if accurate) manner is racist. Your average white person is racist, and could say such things with out racism, but the social impact of being labeled a racist can ruin your life. So White people shut up. Minorities can say whatever they want about whom ever they want, But Whitey is "Acceptable Targets."

A personal example. I took a history class on the Civil Rights movement. One day we watched a video recording of a KKK member giving a speech. This man didn't wear the white robes however. He was dressed in a suit, spoke calmly, rationally, and never lost control of himself. Instantly, the rest of the class was in the mode that he was a White Supremest and therefore they shouldn't listen to what he said except to tear it apart. I, as an alchemist, knew there was a grain of truth in everything, however wrong this man's message was and sought to listen with an open and analytical mind. Standing roughly fifty years in the future from when he spoke, I tried to line up the present situation to his predictions in a hope to prove him wrong. He spoke the usual rhetoric about how Blacks would cause a massive rise in crimes of all sorts, among other things, such as how Black would side with the Communists to bring down society (He lost me there, but after seeing Beck back up a lot of stuff about Progressives, I'm forced to reconsider and conclude this KKK Racist might not have been blowing smoke).

Sadly, in my comparison, I was forced to conclude that this KKK member, racist bastard that he was, had been far more accurate than one would think possible. In fact, he was so accurate it was scary.

This is why America is a Nation of Cowards.

I don't hold with the KKK or any Racist organization. I judge men and women equally, not by the color of their skin, but by the deeds of their hands and the words of their mouths. I judge by one standard for everyone. So what am I to think when one group, above all others, fails to measure up? When they scream "Cracker, you gonna be ruled by the Black Man now!"

It is a sad fact that in the forty or fifty years since the Civil Rights movement, the Black community has not gotten better. In that same amount of time, however, every other racial group from the Irish to the Hispanics, while facing far more racism in their first generation of freedom here in America, succeeded in drastically improving their community without any of the help that Black have. One can argue that slavery and the oppression during Reconstruction greatly hindered Blacks, but there have been so many programs to give them a leg up that one wonders why they aren't as successful in both political and social circles as every other ethnic group in America.

No one has been able to answer that question honestly. If it is because of Whitey, they why are the Asian and Hispanic communities not being held back as well? If the system is as racist as people say, then everyone would be in the same boat as the Black Community. Yet they are not.

Can someone please give me their answer for this question? Maybe if we can get enough answers, we can solve this question.

Zenster said...

Fjordman: What do they want to achieve by this? Do they want to break down whites because we are perceived as being too unruly and thus a potential threat to an international, authoritarian New World Order? Are we considered potential rivals to the ruling oligarchs, who want to create a permanent caste system with themselves on top? Do they want to turn the entire world into one giant shopping mall, starting with the West? Or are they Marxists who desire a "Final Solution to the Capitalist Problem" by eradicating whites? Is it all of the above, or are there other reasons?

I would suggest reading Ayn Rand’s “The Fountainhead” for an answer that managed to elude your otherwise useful list.

The Modern White Elite™ simply hate those who can outwit them; at least, those from among their own racial stock. Clearly, they have no problem being gulled by the Little Brown Brothers™ that these Liberal bigots so readily condescend to. Islam is rather stark proof of that.

Currently, we have a Western ruling class that has lost all sight of the genius and innovative mindset that drove Europe and, especially, America to pre-eminence. The skill set of these elite is predominately limited to uninspired hucksterism and mimicry. Quite simply, they are collectively incapable of inventing their way out of a brown paper bag.

Additionally, so much of the West’s current crop of political leadership derives from an over-schooled and underworked upper class that they have evolved a near-total disdain for the actual creation of wealth. Redistribute it? Yes. Actually create it? [gasp!] What could you possibly be thinking?

Any functional student of economics knows that there are only three ways of creating wealth: mining, agriculture and manufacturing. Since when has there been a shred of political leadership with expertise in any of those vital and productive fields? We are being legislated and corporately managed to death by a bunch of Ivy League pansies who have never done a minute of heavy lifting in their entire lives and wouldn’t know which end of a hammer to grasp if they only could overcome their disdain for real work long enough to pick it up and smash their thumb with it.

Thomas Edison said that “Genius is ten percent inspiration and ninety percent perspiration”. The total absence of brilliance endemic to our halls of power stands in dumb testimony to the genius lacking within them and betrays a Socialistic bent that seeks to level all humanity through legislated equality where there is none to be expected and make interchangeable an entire workforce who’s true success relies upon innovative excellence.

Thus is Ayn Rand’s own grim prediction finally unveiled. Ellsworth Toohey’s detestation of the irreplaceable individual so symbolized in Howard Roark has become a much vaunted sigil of the Vampire Elite™. They are not only revulsed by the notion of toiling to produce an original idea but just the mere thought of such onerous mental labor gives them a case of underclass workingman vapors that a case of smelling salts can barely dissipate.

How do we stop them?

By demanding actual leadership from our political class. Not the charismatic mouthing of bromides and platitudes but real leadership by those worthy of the role.

Should we have a Nuremberg Trial against the anti-whites after the fall of Multiculturalism?

One word, three letters: YES

Cobra said...

Zero would like nothing more than a race riot to allow him to push his trotskyite agenda on US.
His "private army" he wants to have, is ready to be deployed, just in time for the November elections.
Have you seen the video of the New Panther guy rooting for a confrontation with the Tea Partiers?

Fjordman,
I very rarely disagree with you, but, this time you may be wrong.
NAACP was created by your fellow travelers, and the civil rights movement was clearly used to push the communist agenda/war on the USA.
Ex KGB guys stated clearly that the USSR had a policy to create and exploit racial tensions inside USA.
Guess which ethnic group inside the USA was the most enthusiastic in working for the communist enemy?
Yep. You guessed it.

Darrin Hodges said...

Readers may find this article by By Dr. Stephen Steinlight interesting (http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/back404.html),it explores some of the themes raised by "admin_nds".

Papa Whiskey said...

I hold no brief for this baboon or any of the other creatures in his organization, and let any of them trifle with me at the peril of a 230-grain hollowpoint in the snot locker. Nor do I look with equanimity on their high-yaller protectors in Washington.

That said, though, it should be noted that there are plenty of upstanding black folks who ought not to be lumped in with such vermin. A case in point occured during the 1992 L.A. riots, when four black folks rescued a white truck driver attacked by a black gang and got him to a hospital, saving his life. A Guatemalan construction worker was also attacked and saved by a black preacher who interposed himself between the rioters and their prey. Consider also Col. Allen West, whom I heard speak at the CPAC Counterjihad event in February and whose stirring words were translated into many languages on this very site.

One must always take care to separate the wheat from the chaff. It is also worthwhile to bear in mind Matthew 7:2.

Zenster said...

Papa Whiskey: One must always take care to separate the wheat from the chaff.

I have no problem with responsible people of any hue or shade. Your example of Alan West is spot on the money.

Still, it really is up to Black Americans and Muslims to begin separating "the wheat from the chaff".

Much as with Islam, if they wait around for someone else to do it, the work performed will be nowhere near as fastidious as they might have wished. Our clogged judicial system's rather routine dispensing of harsher sentences to black criminals is pretty solid proof of that.

ZZMike said...

"I hate white people. I hate my enemy…”"

Isn't there some way someone might find a way to spin that into at least a semblance of hate speech"?