>I don't have a problem with it. You know why? Because as I
>researched further I found out more about Malcolm and how he
>was a problem not only for the NOI, but also the U.S. and
>countries across the globe. But this was before the movie.
>But see, I don't expect a movie to solely educate me, maybe
>you do. The movie did its job. It planted a seed, and caused
>you to do more digging on the subject if you wanted to.
>Malcolm's entire life could not be reduced to 3 1/2 hours. But
>again, people want to nitpick.
>
Well, you need to also research the likes of Gabriel Prosser, Denmark Vessey, Dr. M.L. King and the U.N.I.A. and Black Panther Party Movements. Maybe, just maybe you will detect a pattern of how the powers in this nation react to what they detect maybe a disruption of the ol' status quo. But then again maybe you won't.

The movie planted a seed that has yet to bear any fruit. Since that movie came out, we've seen Hip Hop music go from a socially/politically/culturally conscious movement, in some respects, to an all time low of decadence. I'm not saying that this reality is Spikes fault or is the fault of the movie, but can you name one activists who claims that this movie changed their life?


>
>Do you know the history of the NOI and its form of
>"sacrifices" back in the day.

Well, history according to who? There is always two sides to every story. If you were to ask me if I knew the history of the Native Americans that inhabitted this land first and I said no, I would get a very different picture painted for me, depending on who's doing the story telling.

Do you know they were shooting
>and killing their members around the time they were trying to
>hunt down Malcolm X? And they killed a lot more after
>Malcolm's death.
>

Source please. A link, a book, a magazine article, something.


>>It is
>>well known that the organization had more than its fair
>share
>>of zealots who were unhappy with Malcolm,
>
>Elijah Muhammad included.
>

What is your basis for the above allegation?



>>viewed him as a
>>traitor, and thought that he should be dealt with, but that
>>doesn't speak to the head of the organization, because the
>>official word was to leave him alone.
>>
>
>Really? lol. Elijah Muhammad was jealous of Malcolm as well.
>He felt eclipsed by Malcolm and feared that Malcolm would
>leave and build another movement just like Malcolm had built
>the Nation to what it had become. The Nation was nothing
>before Malcolm came on the scene. Do some research, brother?
>Elijah Muhammad knew what was going on, and didn't mind
>Malcolm being silenced.
>
I see. This is a very popular opinion. And I can't say that I disagree with everything that you've stated above, but I will say that I don't believer that Elijah was not jealous of Malcolm. I really don't know if he was or not and neither do you, but I don't believe that that was the case.

However, I will grant that Malcolm played a MAJOR, MAJOR role in building up the NOI. Who can deny that. The contributions he made to the organization are immeasurable.

On a side note: It is common belief/opinion/mode of thought among many that Malcolm was brilliant and Elijah was just some bumbling idiot, incapable of void real intellect. This is thinking is evil and just plain wrong. While Malcolm was very much a self-taught man, much of what he learned and what we came to love as Malcolm X, was the result of Elijah's work, teaching/mentoring, leading, and influencing Malcolm. Please check your Elijah hate barometer; it's off da charts.

Do some research? Brother, there are so many books, articles, documentaries, etc. that have been done on Malcolm, Elijah Muhammad and the NOI that I don't know where to begin to gain the understanding and perspective that you have formed for yourself. YOU NEED TO REFERENCE THESE THINGS TO MAKE YOUR CASE PROPERLY!!!!!


>
>>
>>
>
>Captain Joseph X of temple #7 of the NOI admitted to bombing
>the house before his died in the early 90's.

Source please.


And in the video
>"Make it Plain" Joesph X tried to avoid the issue when they
>asked him about who bombed Malcolm's house. He said he didn't
>know, but had guilt written all over his face in that
>documentary. But Joseph admitted to bombing the house.
>

This is a matter of complete subjective interpretation. I saw this video presentation and I didn't see guilt on Yusef Shah's (f/k/a Joseph Ali) face; I saw contempt, I saw anger, I saw quite outrage; but I didn't see jealousy. As a matter of fact, he had the attitude that said to me, "If I did it, I'd tell ya to ya damn face, 'Yeah, I did it so what about, motherfucker?'"




>>
>>Who contributed more to the old divide and conquer,
>>>brother? The "gubment" or blacks themeselves. That is what
>>>Spike was getting at. Its why he chose to leave that quote
>>of
>>>Malcolm in the movie of "n*ggas ruined it". Were there
>>outside
>>>forces? Yes. But the heart of the problem existed within
>the
>>>Nation. Not outside of it. THAT is what Spike chose to
>focus
>>>on. The crux of the matter.
>>
>>We are a flawed people with many, many problems and anytime
>we
>>attempt to get together on anything, there is a destructive
>>mechanism that tends to take place (some identify it as the
>>"Willie Lynch chip") that blocks us from gelling completely
>>and often things turn out to be a total mess.
>
>lol. This is a joke. See, that is a problem right there. They
>only have power when you give it too them.

They have the power and they will have it until we decide that we are going to take it. This whole society and system is constructedto
assure that they do not lose power. See Marimba Ani's "Yurugu" for an indepth analysis of this.

Forget that "willie
>lynch" bullsh*t. It comes down to responsibility. When are
>black people going to take responsibility for themselves and
>predicament and stop blaiming "the man".

Is this question rhetorical?

See, THAT notion was
>in the movie, brother. But if you weren't nitpicking so much,
>you probably wouldn't have missed that key concept. That was
>the essence of Malcolm. THAT was in the movie.
>

I wasn't nitpicking; my issues with the movie are real. Also, I am a fan of Spike Lee; I just wasn't all that crazy about the "Malcolm X" movie.

>>I don't deny
>>that we, as a people, have problems; but I also realize that
>>this is not something that is inherent in us.
>
>Its inherent in all people. Weak people choose to adhere and
>abide by it. Malcolm was not weak. The NOI was. That is why
>Malcolm left or was forced out. Again, THAT was in the movie.
>

I was speaking about us, not all people. Many our problems and how we obtained these problems are unique to us as people. That's just how that is. The NOI was not perfect and it had flawed individuals among its members, but the organization was not weak. And it is blasphemous for you to make such a statement.





>>It is the
>>result of centuries of outside forces conditioning us and
>>influencing us. I acknowledge that.
>>
>
>And it will be centuries before blacks actually get anywhere
>unless they lose the inferiority complex when it comes to
>whites and teh so-called power structures. Why don't you
>acknowledge that? THAT was in the movie, brother. Its all in
>the mind.

What was in the movie? Where was it? Cite an example, please?


>
>>At the same time, I can not turn a blind eye and ignore when
>>we have been deliberately and blatantly been fucked with.
>
>Right, the learned helplessness syndrome. That is what Malcolm
>X was totally against. THAT was in the movie.
>
>
>Malcolm's murder was the result of the NOI with assistance
>from those outside forces. He wasn't the first NOI member to
>be f*cked up and gunned down.

Source please.



>Do some research.

What and where do you want me to research?

Malcolm's
>murder was the result of fear,jealousy, and the quest for
>power within the NOI with help from the FBI, CIA, NYPD, and
>United States.

What is the basis of the above statement? Is it merely your opinion, is it your opinion based on some citable fact evidence, is it a published fact?

If facts are involed please cite a source.



The gestation and core root of this problem was
>birthed in the NOI. The outside forces didn't have much work
>to do. It was going to be done with or without them.

You have got to be kidding. To quote our beloved elder and now Most Honored Ancestor, John H. Clarke, in his autobiographical documentary "A Long and Mighty Walk", he stated, in sum that he believed that Farrakhan's rheteric contributed to the atmosphere that enabled Malcolm to be assassinated. He also stated that he believed that Malcolm's death was bigger than some local, domestic squabble with the NOI. And then he also stated that he believed Malcolm would've been assassinated had there not been a Farrakhan.





>
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Its a 3 hour movie. Malcolm X
>>>>>lived several lifetimes in 39 1/2 years. There were
>always
>>>>>going to be things missing that aren't in the movie. I
>>>don't
>>>>>understand that criticism.
>>>>
>>>>Agreed. And he could've cut down on some of the non-sense
>>>>jitterbug time at the beginning and inserted a strong
>>>>implication (at the very least) that imperialist interests
>>>>were threatened by MX and his vision and ultimate goal and
>>>>that US Intelligence along with other like agencies in
>>other
>>>>nations were making serious moves to eliminate him.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Right, and if he did that, critics would say why did he
>just
>>>cover the latter part of his life? Why did he just cover
>>that
>>>aspect? Warner Brothers didn't even want him to give a 3 hr
>>>limit? Come on now, you are fishing for straws.
>>>
>>First of all dude, I don't fish. If you enjoyed the movie
>for
>>it's entertainment value, that's fine, but don't try to make
>>it seem like this was all that great of an adaptation of
>MX's
>>life, because IMO, it wasn't.
>
>Right, because Spike made up every event in the movie, lol.
>Okay, to each his own. You want to blame the white power
>structure, fine.

Spike didn't make up every event but he definitely used cinematic license and his goal IMO was definitely to entertain before inform or educate.

That is what makes Spike great. He can't win
>with anybody.

Spike Lee's greatness is not up for debate; there's no questioning it.


He chose to make you look in the mirror. You
>don't want to look in the mirror.

I look in the mirror everyday; I a'int got no problem with that. But I can look in the mirror and watch my back at the same time.

You want the blame to go
>somebody else.
>

It's not about blaming somebody else; it's about looking at the whole situation and judging it based on facts and evidence; not just mere personal opinion.


>> No doubt, Malcolm's life was
>>complex and there was a lot that can still be told no matter
>>what all is included, but to focus and shucking and jiving
>and
>>partying and bullshitting as much as he chose to was
>>ridiculous and disappointing.
>>
>
>All that stuff was in his life. Why don't you blame Malcolm
>for putting it in his autobiography. Maybe you need to watch
>the movie again. Because the focus was not "shucking and
>jiving and
>>partying and bullshitting". Those events in Boston and Harlem
>shaped Malcolm X as a person. It was part of his development.
>Malcolm even said himself guys with his type of background who
>could transform themselves to do good are the most devastingly
>effective people to help the problems and plight of the black
>community. That was extremely relevant. Its part of his life.
>Apparently you wanted another movie.
>

It's fine that he inclued the fact that Malcolm was a street guy in the movie, but I just think that he should've given at least equal time to the Intelligence Community's role in assassinating Malcolm, not just spying on him or keeping tabs on him, but moving to eliminate him.


>>
>>>>Instead, Spike leaves the viewer with the impression of
>>this
>>>>being just simply another case of Black on Black violence.
>
>>>>And MX's murder was much bigger than that.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Yes it was. But it doesn't ingnore the fact that his own
>>>brothers wanted him canceled for no reason but their own
>>>jealousy of his power.
>>>
>>
>>Some may've wanted him dead, I'll give you that; but that
>>doesn't mean that they killed him.
>
>lol. I mean, nobody from the NOI pulled the trigger.
>
Actually, only one out of the 5 that were involved is actually known to have been in the NOI. The rest were most likely FBI agents or recruits.

You don't believe me? Well check the book, "The Assassination of Malcolm X", by George Breitman and "Conspiracy: Unraveling the Assasination of Malcolm X" by Baba Zak Kondo.

In the mean time, you can chew on the links below to tide you over until you get a hold of the above referenced literature:

http://www.leftgatekeepers.com/articles/WhoEliminatedMalcolmXByBobFeldman.htm

http://partners.nytimes.com/library/film/022193lee-malcolm-book.html

Maybe they will provide some insight into what I've been talking about.



>>What makes you think that
>>the hostility towards Malcolm was purely jealousy and envy
>as
>>if there were no other issues involved?
>
>When did I say there weren't other issues involved? But the
>core of the hostility towards Malcolm was jealousy and fear
>amongst his brethren in the Nation. The Nation had a lot of
>crooked people. They were thieves. They were stealing money,
>they enjoyed their little positions of power. And they all
>were jockeying for the top job. Malcolm was nothing like that.
>He was the heir apparent to Elijah Muhammad. They had to get
>rid of him, because Malcolm did succeed, he would have gotten
>rid of them and cleaned up the Nation for its own good.
>

>See,a lot of the NOI were frauds. It was a hustle for a lot
>them, Elijah Muhammad included. They had a good thing going.
>Money was coming in. Malcolm, in the name of righteousness,
>was disrupting the hustle that existed. Those hustling crooks
>were able to enjoy those fruits because Malcolm had built the
>movement through his own personal labor in the name of Allah.
>Malcolm's movement was built on righteousness. That is why in
>the movie,in one of its most telling scenes, Malcolm throws it
>back at Baines and says, "I'm telling you God's words not no
>hustle...Brother Baines is a 2-bit hustler and one hand washes
>the other". The divide was there. See, that wasn't
>entertainment. That was a depiction of the reality that
>existed within the Nation of Islam.
>

These are strong words and allegations that you are making in the above diatribe. I mean, you didn't declare that there were a few who were stealing and thieving; you just made it sound like the whole NOI was an organization filled with crooks. What are these allegations based upon? YOU MUST BACK UP THESE TYPES OF ALLEGATIONS WITH EVIDENCE!!

Bring some real facts to the table, not empty quotes from that silly movie.


>> You've been watching
>>this comfounded movie too much.
>>
>
>Actually, I've done my research, brother. Its what Malcolm was
>all about. He did not rely on one resource for information. If
>he did he would have been crippled, mentally like most in the
>Nation were and like a lot of them are today with Farrakhan as
>the leader. And the Nation wouldn't have become the movement
>it became wit Malcolm as its spokesman. He was exhaustive in
>acquiring information. That is why his mind, power, and force
>was untouchable. The only way to get rid of him was kill him.
>You've been watching the confounded movie in your head too
>much.
>
>

Brother, you are a Malcolm worshipper. Malcolm was a GREAT man, but he had flaws and played a part in the atmosphere that led to his own assassination. If you recognize that, nothing that I say to you on this matter will make sense to you.


>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>This is a great movie to capture Malcolm and his life.
>Its
>>>>not
>>>>>going to cover every minute detail. It encourages you to
>>>>seek
>>>>>more about Malcolm and learn more about him.
>>>>>
>>>>No doubt. But unfortunately, for the masses, more indepth
>>>>research is not going to occur. So this movie, for all
>>it's
>>>>worth, is going to be their education on and impression of
>>>MX.
>>>> This is the sad reality.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Is that Spike's fault or the masses?
>>
>>The intellectual laziness of the masses is not Spikes fault
>>and I never claimed that it was. I feel that if Spike is
>>going to make a movie on a man like Malcolm, who means so
>many
>>things to so many people, he should be responsible and
>>represent Malcolm's image properly and intelligently,
>because
>>for many, if they don't get that at this movie, they're not
>>gonna get it at all, ever.
>
>Again, Spike represented Malcolm's image properly and
>intelligently. Again, you are blaiming Spike for what others
>don't do. That isn't Spike's fault. Spike did his part. And he
>did a damn good job of it. The onus is on everybody else to do
>their part, brother. You and myself included.
>

I'm not blaming Spike for what others don't do; I'm blaming Spike for what he didn't do.

>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Spike can't win with the critics.
>>>>
>>>>When you take on a project like this that involves an
>>ICONIC
>>>>figure like MX, you'd better expect some criticism. I
>>mean,
>>>>it comes with the territory.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Really? No matter how great that movie is? I see. lol
>>>
>>
>>Yes, criticism comes with the territory, especially when you
>>do a theatrical reflection of Malcolm, so expect it.
>>Honestly, it's one of those things where you just can't
>please
>>everybody.
>
>As we see with your posts. lol
>

You're critical you damn self and on top of that, much of your criticism appears to be unfounded.


>>And "great" is relative and completely subjective.
>> And even if a movie is considered "great" as a general
>>concensus, that doesn't keep it from being a thing that can
>be
>>critiqued and criticized.
>>
>
>Critizied and critiqued is one thing. Nitpicking because its
>Spike Lee who directed the movie, is another.
>
>
Man look, I'm a fan of Spike's work. I love that brother and what he has brought to celluloid for us as a people. I was just a lil' disappointed in this movie. It was good movie and he did fairly well considering how tall the task was, but I just felt he came up short (no put intended).


>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>Thats what makes Malcolm X
>>>>>the movie even more special. It can't be denied because
>>its
>>>>so
>>>>>good. Sure, the critics will find flaws and nitpick. But
>>>>deep
>>>>>in their hearts they know its a masterpiece. And they
>>can't
>>>>>stand it. lol
>>>>>
>>>>It was a good piece of entertainment that was BASED ON the
>>>>life and times and death of Malcolm X. No more, no less.
>>>>
>>>
>>>When did Spike or the marketing department say otherwise.
>It
>>>says right on the DVD package as such.
>>
>>Agreed. Good entertainment is all the movie really was when
>>it comes down to it.
>
>lol. Right, there was nothing factual in the movie. LMAO!!
>

Spike's goal IMO was to primarily entertain and not inform or educate.


>>If given a choice between watching this movie
>>or watching a documentary on Malcom, I will ALWAYS select
>the
>>documentary.
>>
>
>Good for you. Because the documentary will cover every angle
>of Malcolm's life. lol Thats why there are so many of them and
>each one leaves out a lot of information that is important.
>lol
>
>
I don't care if a presentation covers every single facet of his life. I am just more into seeing and hearing Malcolm speak for himself instead of watching Denzel or anyone else "play" Malcolm for primarily entertainment purposes. But that's just me. You do you.

<<<<"Nothings more attractive than a heavy praying woman" © Andre 3000