>>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.
>

Brother, I don't need to check that out. Thank you and I appreciate your offering of giving me information, but I'm already aware of that information. I'm aware of J. Edgar Hoover and his obsession and fear and torture of blacks in his high placed position. I'm aware of the powers that had been and be and what they have done to destroy black people. But I'm also aware of what black people themselves have also done to black people.


>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.

That had nothing to do with the Movie. That was what was going on at that time, brother. That was the climate. You released the same movie Malcolm X 5 years later, and it would have done worse at the box office. It would have had less impact, because the climate was different. The movie's financial success and popularity during the time of its release was because of the climate and what the people wanted. In fact, it was the tail-end of the "socially/politically/culturally conscious movement" you referred to. Hardcore rap was pushing to the forefront. The Chronic was released that year and took off and a new era was born in hip-hop. But that had nothing to do with the Movie.

> 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?
>

Why does it have to be an activist who claims it changed their life? Why did this movie or any movie have to change someone's life. I didn't know that was a requirement of Spike. I know of several people who were deeply affected by the movie and changed for the better. Some actually joined the NOI. Can you imagine that? They aren't necessarily lip-professing activists in the national spotlight who pose has a "freedom fighter". They are actually people in the communtiy who go unnoticed. Young people were affected by this and for some it caused them to want to learn more about Malcolm X and actually go read his autobiography and do more research about the man.

In fact if you think about it, it brought his name back to life. Martin Luther King was taught in grade schools. Malcolm X wasn't.


>
>>
>>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.
>


Well, believe what you want to believe brother, but here you go:

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Olympus/4222/noi4.html

"For a fee of ten dollars, Ford gave Islamic sounding names to cult members, Elijah and his family going through a series of name changes, finally settling on Muhammad. Among Ford's teachings, was a call for followers to sacrifice whites in order for the person 'to return to his home in Mecca.' Followers were also encouraged to believe in human sacrifice, 'of himself or his loved ones if Allah requires it.' In November of 1932, Robert Karriem Harris, one of the earliest members of 'the Nation Cult of Islam', was convicted of murder in Detroit in the sacrificial slaying of Nation follower, James J. Smith, amidst reports of other slayings. This event, referred to in Detroit as the infamous 'Voodoo Murders,' led to the confinement of Elijah Karriem (who at the time used the alias, Ghulam Bogans) to a mental ward, and the banisof his teacher, Wallace Dodd Ford to Chicago."



>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.
>

here is some more info from that same link:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Olympus/4222/noi4.html

"In 1964, Aubrey Barnett, a former Boston minister under Louis X Farrakhan, quit the group after being fed up with the deceptions. Barnett was soon after viciously assaulted on a Boston street by 13 of Elijah's men. On November 5, 1964, ex-member Kenneth Morton, died from internal injuries suffered when he was beaten by four members of 'the Nation.' During the same year, Malcolm X, former national spokesman for Elijah Muhammad, renounced Elijah's organization, made Hajj and became a Muslim, and officially changed his name to Al-Hajj Malik Shabazz; openly declaring Elijah Muhammad to be a false prophet, thief and fornicator. This led to Elijah printing a series of articles critical of Malik Shabazz in issues of Muhammad Speaks, referring to Malik Shabazz as a 'hypocrite,' including a call for Malik Shabazz' death written by Louis X Farrakhan.

On January 6, 1965, ex-member Benjamin Brown, who left 'the Nation' to establish a masjid, was shot in front of his masjid. This was followed by a series of unsuccessful attempts on Malik Shabazz' life by Nation members. On February 21, 1965, Malik Shabazz was assassinated by Nation members in New York City. This was immediately followed by the brutal beating in Boston of Leon 4X Ameer, a former bodyguard for Malik Shabazz. Left in a coma for weeks as a result of the beating, Ameer emerged from the hospital in a vegetative state with permanent brain damage. He died shortly thereafter.

In 1971, twenty-five Nation members walked out of Temple no. 2 in Chicago, with the complaint that not enough money collected from members was reaching poor blacks. This led to the murder of two of the dissidents. In 1972, author Hakeem A. Jamal, a friend of Malik Shabazz and like him, an outspoken critic of Elijah Muhammad, was gunned down by Nation members. On January 18, 1973 in Washington DC, the most gruesome of murders took place when several assassins were dispatched from Elijah Muhammad's Philadelphia branch temple to kill ex-follower Hamaas Abdul Khaalis, who had written dozens of letters to Elijah's temples nationwide, calling Elijah a 'lying deceiver who was stealing his followers' money and dooming them to Hell'. The assassins entered Hamaas' home, finding seven members of his family, all women and children. The assassins beat and shot the women and children numerous times, ransacking the house, then drowning two infants in a sink and tub. Hamaas' daughter Amina, who survived despite being shot six times in the head at close range, recalled that one of the killers asked her, "Why did your father write those letters?" His last words to her were, "Don't mess with Elijah." The killers fled, but after a nationwide manhunt, all were eventually captured and convicted.
"

Now in terms of Leon 4X Ameer, he was in the movie/documentary "Malcolm X" released in 1972 I believe, it was narrated by James Earl Jones. Its basically a collection of speeches of Malcolm and interviews. Its included as a bonus DVD in the release of Malcolm X the movie. Anyway, Leon was beaten severely by the NOI weeks before Malcolm X's death. Malcolm spoke at the podium and brought brother Leon to the podium. And Malcolm spoke how the NOI beat him, trying to get to Malcolm. Leon also spoke about the incident in the movie.

Now Leon is later killed after Malcolm's assasination. And this could be what you are talking about in terms of the FBI's involvement here is link you may find interesting (its 4 parts, but very interesting):

http://www.theconspiracy.us/9408/0029.html

"But one of Malcolm's top aides, Leon 4X Ameer, went to the FBI,
about, I think it was ten days after Malcolm was killed, and
indicated that he felt that there were elements not only within the
Nation of Islam proper, but within the US government that were
behind Malcolm's assassination. He then was found dead, himself,
a few days later at the age of 32 in his apartment in Boston.
Initially, they said it was suicide, then they changed that to a
drug overdose, but the final disposition of the case was that he
died of natural causes, despite the fact that he was in good health
at the age of 32. It is worth noting that Ameer took his wife and
child and relocated them from Boston prior to his death, because he
felt that his life was in danger and he did not want his wife and
child to die if and when the assassins came for him. That is still
the official version of the death of Leon Ameer, namely, natural
causes at the age of 32 within ten days of (actually it was about
a week) having visited the FBI and voiced his suspicions about U.S.
governmental involvement in the assassination of Malcolm X."







>
>>>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?
>

Watch "Make it plain" again, brother. Listen to what Wilfred (Malcolm's oldest brother) says about getting word that Elijah and the family were unhappy that Malcolm was getting all the press and basically eclipsing Elijah in stature. Or read up on how the secretaries of Elijah said that Elijah feared Malcolm would leave and betray him. Or watch the "Brother Malcolm" dvd documentary. Where Charles 37x said that at a meeting with the NOI members in philadelphia with Elijah and Malcolm there. Elijah referred to Malcolm as the brother whom you will have to kill. Charles 37x couldn't even finish the words because he was all choked up when he said it. It was too paintful for him. These aren't things I'm pulling from out of my head, brother. This is documented information.


>
>
>>>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.
>

Not necessarily true, my brother. Now, if you read Malcolm's autobiography, Malcolm started taking correspondence classes in English, etc. to start better himself before he came across the Nation from his brothers Philbert and Reginald. Malcom was also inspired by a brother named "Bimbi" as well. Again, before he came across the teachings of Elijah Muhammad.

Now, having said that. The great man you referred to,John H. Clarke, spoke of in the "Brother Malcolm" documentary, how Malcom had a "non-muslim" cabinet. He said Malcolm was "devastatingly effective" because of his avid pursuit of information. He said Malcolm believed and knew that the muslims did not have a lot information and knowledge that was out there. He said Malcolm utilized him, John H. Clarke, in terms of information on history. Malcolm had different branches of his non-muslim cabinet from which he learned, sociology, etc. John H. Clarke referred to himself as Malcolm's "history department" of this cabinet.

So yes, Elijah Muhammad played some part in Malcolm's development, but the Malcolm also played his part in his development as well as others outside of the Nation of Islam. In fact, its one of the main reasons they wanted to get rid of Malcolm while he was in the Nation. Malcolm was leaning more and more into nationalistic talk instead of religous talk. Watch the "Make it plain" dvd again, brother. Listen to what Philber (malcolm's brother) breaks down how the differences in ideology between Malcolm's nationalistic stance vs. NOI's spiritual/religious stance. NOI, to my understanding, at that time wanted nothing to do with the political process and protests of the civil rights movement.


>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.
>

Watch the Brother Malcolm DVD documentary. They report the fact that Joeseph X admitted to bombing the house. They also report how John Ali was an FBI informant. John Ali was a secretary in the NOI. One of the more powerful leaders in the NOI. In fact, he met with Talmage Hayer the night before the assasination of Malcolm X.
>
>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?'"
>

^^^This is subjective interpretation as well. Joseph's X whoe demeanor changed when asked that question. His body language and everything. He looked suspicsous and guilty to me. We will agree to disagree on that one.


>
>
>
>>>
>>>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.
>

I won't bother. I can read the Bible and The Holy Quran. The power from those 2 books speaking on the divine indominatable power is far greater than the miniscule power of the system. With God on your side, you can't go wrong.

>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?
>

I don't know brother, is it?

>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?
>

Why don't you listen to some of speeches in the movie that are derived verbatim from actual Malcolm speeches that occured. Why don't you look at the actions of the Nation in the movie. Weren't they becoming self-sufficient with their businesses that they owned. They stopped looking up at the white man, and looked straight into his eyes, like all men should. When Malcolm was forced out of the Nation, look at the speech he made about "whites can help but the can't join us...we have to help ourselves" Again these were taken directly from Malcolm's speeches. "Stopped begging the white man" is one of Malcolm's favorite phrases.


>
>>
>>>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.
>

Again, brother. Refer to the links I posted above. Also check out the book "Prophet of Rage" by Aurthur Magida. It documents about some of the killings referred to earlier in my post. And it talks about a few more. It also talks about the severe beatings within the Nation amongst its members upon one antoher. They even cited an incident where Louis Farrakhan's brother-in-law was severely beaten in the basement of Louis's own temple in Boston by his captain. They told him to stop crying while getting his beating. Crying only disrespects Minister Louis.


>
>
>>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.
>


Again, check out what John H. Clarke says in the "Brother Malcolm" documentary and the "Make it plain" documentary. He talks about how people in the Nation enjoyed their petty positions and how they were crooks. And if Malcolm would become the successor to Elijah he would weed out the crooks within the Nation. So, according to John H. Clarke, "the idea was to get rid of him (Malcolm) before the passing of the old man (Elijah Muhammad)". They wanted the top job, but Malcolm was in the way. He said they created an atmosphere within the Nation of Islam, Farrahkan included, to get rid of Malcolm.

Benjamin Karim, a close associate of Malcolm who was in the Nation and left when they were treating Malcolm the way they were talks about this in the "Brother Malcolm" documentary. He said the NOI had shifted its whole stance. They were instructed to ridicule and slander Malcolm in public. Benjamin said that wasn't what they were taugh initially in Islam. He said they had flipped the script. He said it wasn't right. And he said left the NOI, as well as others, because of it.

Again, I'm not talking off the top of my head. If you study and do research you can form your own conclusions. AND, when you hear it from those who were actually there,well I don't know what else to say brother. Believe what you want to believe.


>
>
>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.

Yes, I know this. I've never denied this. You should really check out the "Brother Malcolm DVD". You would really like it, I think. It harps on mostly the FBI, CIA, and NYPD's involvement in getting rid of Malcolm. John H. Clarke is in there as well. It talks about things that you find is a problem with the movie Malcolm X.

But again, the core root of the problem existed within the Nation of Islam. And it made the outside forces job a lot easier to get rid of Malcolm with the NOI wanting to kill him.

>And then he also stated that he believed Malcolm would've
>been assassinated had there not been a Farrakhan.
>

Farrakhan is another post in itself, brother. lol In the Brother Malcolm documentary, John H. Clarke makes the statement "I think you need to ask Louis Farrakhan some questions, about his loyalty". He referrs to Farrakhan being trained by Malcolm and then latern not speaking up for Malcolm when he was getting slandered by the Nation and then Farrakhan leading the charge.

But Farrakhan is no threat to anybody. Farrakhan was about power and wanting to be the big fish within the Nation. And he is now. But at what price? Deep in his heart of hearts he wants a legacy for himself, amongst the masses. He wants to go down like MLK and Malcolm as being one of the great leaders talked about after his death. But Farrakhan lacked the courage they had. And Farrakhan chose power over principle when he went against Malcolm. So in trying to eclipse Malcolm by slandering him, Farrakhan is still in the shadow of Malcolm even in Malcolm's death. And will always be. Farrakhan chose wrong.




>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>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.
>

But the movie was about the life of Malcolm X right based on a lot of his own account, right? Not the Intelligence Community and their actions, right?


>
>>>
>>>>>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.
>

Really, Check out the "Brother Malcolm" documentary. Baba Zak Kondo is in there describing the 4 other men Talmage described. He says otherwise in the DVD. According to him, they were all in the Nation of Islam, Mosque 25. Now he did say, that it seemed one of the guys, the oldest guy of the group, appeaered to be taking orders from some higher ups (most likely the intelligence community you are referring to).

Also, the documentary talks about John Ali being an informant and meeting Talmage Hayer in New York, the night before the assisination.

>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!!
>

Again, refer to what cited from John H. Clarke and Benjamin Karim. Are they liars? Those sentiments were there back then and the events occured.

And Spike had the fictional character Baines, represent that sentiment. That isn't entertainment, brother. That is a depiction of reality.

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

Stop assuming, brother. "Silly movie"? Ah, I see. lol I guess you thought all I did was watch the movie. lol

>
>>> 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.
>

I'm not a worshipper. Idolatry and sonship are not great things. I admire Malcolm a great deal and he inspires me.

And Malcolm's flaw was his naivety while in the Nation. He was so loyal that he was blind to Elijah Muhammad and his ways. He probably would have stayed in the Nation had he not been forced out. Others around had said so. He was that devoted to Elijah. But being forced out was the best thing for Malcolm X and I think he came to realization of what the a lot of the NOI and Elijah had unforunately become: a fraud. And it hurt Malcolm a great deal. It happens to all of us. None of us are immuned.


And to say that Malcolm played a part in the atmosphere that led to his own assassination is a creepy statement, brother. I don't know what you mean by that. But Malcolm standing on the foundation of righteousness and Allah for his people and exposing the forces of the devil that were destroying his people (including the NOI and United States), is no justificaton or reason for him to be killed for it. NONE.


>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>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.
>

<--- we've got bush!