Again. After all this time Spike Lee's film still brings me to tears. In the theater I had to be consoled by strangers. No other film has ever made me get so emotional. I forget how much Spike Lee struggled to get the film made but it remains for the ages. The film has flaws but overall, it's a triumph IMHO.

I can't think of any other films right now with a commercial/mainstream release that have honored a Black leader, hero, or heroine in such an epic way.

Any others I'm missing?

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

The movie was very powerful and I'm really anxious to learn about Malcom X. With that said, the ending of the movie felt rushed...

GOMD

it's a must. and damn good reading too.
____________________________________________________________

get cakey.

http://www.myspace.com/samurai_shampoo

Alex Haley, the author of Roots?

Like the end of the movie implied, he has been erased from the history books. I've only caught small mentions of him throughout my years of school. I respect him, because although he changed his opinions, he was willing to die for what he believed in. One of my really great friends used to be in The Nation of Islam but I'm afraid to approach the subject because he left it and I don't want to put our friendship in jeopardy.

GOMD

>One of my really great friends used to be in The
>Nation of Islam but I'm afraid to approach the subject because
>he left it and I don't want to put our friendship in
>jeopardy.

Hmmmm...my high school mentor was a teenager in the NOI when Malcolm X was gunned down. He left the Nation when Malcolm X was killed and became a true Muslim. I am not Muslim but he taught me so much.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

My real good friend is Muslim too. So, does the Nation of Islam still exist how do black people in general percieve it? Do Muslims look down upon it? Again, I could ask my friend these questions but it is a very touchy subject for him.

GOMD

>My real good friend is Muslim too. So, does the Nation of
>Islam still exist

Very much so.

>how do black people in general percieve it?

I have to admit that the NOI has casted a weird shadow since Malcolm X's death. Some people defend the NOI but I know people who left the Nation after his murder, esp. because he was allegedly murdered by NOIs from No. 25.

Here's something jambone wrote in okayactivist:

"Farrakhan slights Malcolm every chance he gets in one breath, but then talks about how great Malcolm is in another. Farrakhan will never be Malcolm, and it eats at Farrakhan's soul daily. So, all that work the NOI did to get Malcolm out of the Nation backfired because Malcolm became even bigger in life and bigger after his death.

The whole irony is that Malcolm recruited Farrakhan into the Nation in 1955. Malcolm taught and trained Farrakhan as a minister. Malcolm referred to Farrakhan as his "little brother". Malcolm taught Farrakhan's eldest daughter her ABC's. They were so intertwined. Farrakhan has often said Malcolm taught him how to be man. Malcolm was the father figure he never had. If you watch all of the old footage of "Make it Plain" and other old documentaries, you will see a young Farrakhan lurking in the background because he was Malcolm's understudy. Malcolm even mentions how talented and great Farrakhan was in his autobiography.

Yet, it was Farrakhan who betrayed Malcolm in quest for power in the Nation. It was Farrakhan who was one of the main people who plotted to get him out of the NOI. It was Farrakhan who slandered Malcolm in Muhammad Speaks after Malcolm was kicked out of the Nation (Malcolm did not leave the Nation). And it was Farrakhan who was present at the Newark Mosque the day Malcolm was assassinated by members of the Newark Mosque in New York. And it was Farrakhan who took Malcolm's place as being the NOI's National Spokesman." (jambone, from okayplayer.com)

>Do Muslims look down upon it? Again, I could ask my friend
>these questions but it is a very touchy subject for him.

I can see why. I was able to talk openly about it with my mentor. I think he looked down on the actions of the NOI and the part they played in the death of Malcolm X. You should also look into COINTELPRO.

"COINTELPRO is an acronym for a series of FBI counterintelligence programs designed to neutralize political dissidents. Although covert operations have been employed throughout FBI history, the formal COINTELPRO's of 1956-1971 were broadly targeted against radical political organizations." - http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/cointelpro/cointel.htm

My theory is the NOI sold Malcolm X out to protect their organization or get the FBI off their backs. They used his "chickens come home to roost" comment as an excuse to silence him but that did not work, so I think some negotiating went on behind Malcolm X's back. But that's my theory (and I'm sticking to it).

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

Thanks alot for all of th background knowledge.

>"COINTELPRO is an acronym for a series of FBI
>counterintelligence programs designed to neutralize political
>dissidents. Although covert operations have been employed
>throughout FBI history, the formal COINTELPRO's of 1956-1971
>were broadly targeted against radical political
>organizations." -
>http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/cointelpro/cointel.htm
>
>My theory is the NOI sold Malcolm X out to protect their
>organization or get the FBI off their backs. They used his
>"chickens come home to roost" comment as an excuse to silence
>him but that did not work, so I think some negotiating went on
>behind Malcolm X's back. But that's my theory (and I'm
>sticking to it).
>

This is the impression that I got but I didn't want to make any generalizations off of a movie. I have never heard of COINTELPRO before but I also have a couple conspiracy theories of my own. With that said, everyone should fight for their rights or beliefs no matter how others feel.

I went to the anti-immigration rally (in the midst of the pro rally) here in Denver and lost a good friend in the process because I ran into him (he's a Mexican immigrant "pro-illegal amnesty") and told him how I felt about the whole issue and he has since shunned me. I can't begin to imagine how that would feel being in the public eye on a much larger scale, Malcom was made of steel.

Before I get off my soapbox, I'll leave you with one thing: people who complain are lazy, people who take action make strides.

GOMD

>Thanks alot for all of th background knowledge.

No problem. I did not want it to look like it was just the NOI.

>This is the impression that I got but I didn't want to make
>any generalizations off of a movie. I have never heard of
>COINTELPRO

That's a shame...well now you know.

>before but I also have a couple conspiracy theories
>of my own. With that said, everyone should fight for their
>rights or beliefs no matter how others feel.

I have to say that reading Haley's book was life changing for me and I was only 15.

>I can't begin to imagine how that would
>feel being in the public eye on a much larger scale, Malcom
>was made of steel.

Me, neither.

>Before I get off my soapbox, I'll leave you with one thing:
>people who complain are lazy, people who take action make
>strides.

Yeah and it's also important to start from your corner. Act because you feel it, not because other people say so.

Now, I am off my soapbox.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

he often credits malcom x, and the experience writing "the autobiography of malcom x" with getting him to learn about his past, which led to him writing "Roots"

Thanks for the info.

GOMD

>Alex Haley, the author of Roots?
>

Yes.

Great book, great movie.

__________________________________
The man. The myth. The Ruiz.

enjoyed every minute of it. I straight picked it up and couldn't put it down until I was finished.

even of you're not into biographies, I truly recommend this. It made me reevaluate my life.

I will probaly cop it later this week if they have it at my reliable outlet in Cherry Creek North, I hope.

GOMD

>The movie was very powerful and I'm really anxious to learn
>about Malcom X. With that said, the ending of the movie felt
>rushed...

My 7th grade English teacher gave me The Autobiography of Malcolm X and my colleague's father was his personal photographer in the later years, up to his death. Me and my partner in crime used to listen to Malcolm X's speeches when we were freshmen. Hearing them through Denzel Washington was amazing. Washington was riveting as Malcolm X.

About the ending:

I loved that Ossie was able to re-read his eulogy at the end and I think the ending was rushed for a couple of reasons. From imdb.com:

"The film's estimated budget was $34 million. Budget battles plagued the production from the beginning. Initially, director Spike Lee had requested $33 million for the film, a reasonable sum considering the size and scope of the project but far greater than his previous budgets. Additionally, his five previous films combined grossed less than $100 million domestically. As a result of this (and the studio's reluctance to fund black-themed material), Warner Bros. only offered $20 million for a two-hour and 15-minute film, plus an additional $8 million from Largo Entertainment for the foreign rights. When the film went $5 million over budget, Lee kicked in most of his salary, but failed to keep the financiers from shutting down post-production. Lee went public with his battles and raised funds from celebrity friends, such as Oprah Winfrey, Michael Jordan, and Bill Cosby to regain control of his embattled project. Warner eventually kicked in more funds after a positive screening of a rough cut."

and

"Spike Lee removed any mention of Louis Farrakhan from Malcolm X (1992) after receiving specific, direct threats from him."

I think pressure from the studio and threats prevented Spike Lee from doing more at the end of the film. Plus, how can you really express on film Malcolm X's legacy? There are so many things that could have happened if he had lived. I think it was too tall an order even for Lee.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

and i feel no shame in saying that was the only movie i ever cried in...sam cooke dawg. I felt so angry too.

>and i feel no shame in saying that was the only movie i ever
>cried in...sam cooke dawg. I felt so angry too.

Strangers had to hold me down! I was outta control.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

Gets me every time

-----------------------------
http://talestosuffice.com/
@kennykeil

its such a powerful scene

<----holler at a player when you see him in the streets (c)Stuart Scott

www.brucegeetz1.bandcamp.com
http://brucegeetz.blogspot.com/

i won't front, when he's walking to the mosque and the lady stops him and gives praise. i turn. i don't wanna see the rest.

can't help it

http://oneyoungsta.com/

and then she drops the "faith in jesus" line...my heart crushed.

I saw it w/ her when I was a teen.

I didn't understand then, but I saw it a while ago and it was really sad.

_____________________________
"If you had any idea who I was, or what I've done in the past, you'd know that i'm not bluffing."
-Jack fukking Bauer


www.vondarrien.wordpress.com
http://twitter.com/Vondarrien

you will never be invited to any barbeque i'm ever involved in"(C) my ex-girl.

Great GREAT flick

yet I can't help but REALLY like it

by Ossie Davis really tested me, and I had to let a tear roll down my face

Brooklyn...home to the illest emcees in the world. Aint no other city fucking with us.

I'm teaching a course titled "Individual and Society", looking specifically at how people react to oppression. The two main texts are going to be the Autobiography and 1984.


Do you think the movie will go well with 9th-10th graders?

Sua Sponte

Tuam Sequere Naturam


A story: A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands, love a

>Do you think the movie will go well with 9th-10th graders?

Yes but make sure to have a discussion with them. They need to understand why he was killed.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

Gives me a few more options

Sua Sponte

Tuam Sequere Naturam


A story: A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands, love a

i'm a sophomore in high school and i read this book in 8th grade and this year too. It's definitely my favorite book and really changed my life. You should have them read the book first, because theres a strong possibility that if they watch the movie first, they will be bored with the book cause they already know what's going on (since movies are much more entertaining to people my age). Also let them read ahead, cause I read this in like 3 days.

Why was he killed?

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

>Why was he killed?

After his rift with the NOI Malcolm X became a true Muslim and, as El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz, he returned to the U.S. and founded the U.S. branch of the Organization of Afro-American Unity. The OAAU resolved to establish a non-religious and non-sectarian program for human rights.

IMO the stage was being set for Shabazz to address the world which threated the status quo in the U.S. It was easy to label Malcolm X as a reactionary, or a demagogue within the gates of the U.S. but in his new role he was positioned to build bridges and advocate for human rights all over the globe. This would have eventually led to the toppling of the U.S. as a world power. I think Shabazz was transcending the limits of U.S. politics and this made his the biggest threat of all.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

changed alot of shit for the common man which made him a threat. I think MLK was evolving too after his church turned on him cause in one of his final speech(?) he said "I see the light." If those 2 brothers would of gotten together, man I couldn't begin to tell you the changes they would make. I also think Tupac Shakur would of been the black leader we've been wanting for many years cause he related to the people unlike Farrakhan which I like but but he's just too one dimentional(spelling)

DAMN!

...it gets better. Spike gave everything to this project creatively. You could tell because I think it took all of his energy. He went through a whole lot just to get the film made. It took him a while to recover and you could see it in his films right after Malcolm X (Crooklyn, Clockers, Girl 6).

Reading the autobiography is a must. Its funny, it eye-opening, its a lot of stuff in there that you don't here about or see in a lot of research about Malcolm. You really get into the depths of Malcolm in the book. The movie is based on the book,but the some of the characters are fictional in the movie (like Baines) and some of the story is changed that differ from the book.

<--- we've got bush!

BTW I quoted you in #11.

>The movie is based
>on the book,but the some of the characters are fictional in
>the movie (like Baines) and some of the story is changed that
>differ from the book.

Yeah but I see some of those characters (like Baines) as composites. Spike Lee had a lot of pressure on him and threats from Farakkhan forced him to be more creative.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

>BTW I quoted you in #11.
>
>>The movie is based
>>on the book,but the some of the characters are fictional in
>>the movie (like Baines) and some of the story is changed
>that
>>differ from the book.
>
>Yeah but I see some of those characters (like Baines) as
>composites. Spike Lee had a lot of pressure on him and
>threats from Farakkhan forced him to be more creative.
>


Oh yeah, I got no problems with it. I don't know about the Farrakhan thing, though. I remember reading in an interview where the Farrakhan issue was brought up. Spike was like and I'm paraphrasing "he (Farrakhan) knows not to f*ck with me". Meaning, Farrakhan had little bearing on what he decided to put in the film.

I think the Baines character was great and was a collective symbol of what the Nation had represented in Malcom's beginning and right when he was about to leave the NOI. It was great.

<--- we've got bush!

>I don't know about the
>Farrakhan thing, though. I remember reading in an interview
>where the Farrakhan issue was brought up. Spike was like and
>I'm paraphrasing "he (Farrakhan) knows not to f*ck with me".

I remember this, too. Actually, I think it was another guy who threatened Spike but it's been a while...

>I think the Baines character was great and was a collective
>symbol of what the Nation had represented in Malcom's
>beginning and right when he was about to leave the NOI. It was
>great.

I agree.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

the new sig-

"When you know that the life and spirit of others depend on your life and spirit, you have no right to be afraid - even when you are terribly afraid."

-Sembene Ousmane

Co-Sign on the Sam Cooke...one of the most heartbreaking sequences in film.

If you've read Haley's book, you'll want to check out a new Malcom X biography coming out in 2008. It's being written by Manning Marable, a professor of History and African-American studies at Columia.

Here's a link to a great interview he did last year around the 40th anniversary of X's tragic assassination.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/02/21/1458213

I won't post the text b/c it's really long, but take the time to read it if you're seriously interested.

<--- we've got bush!

everytime i watch it its like i've renewed my Blackness.

I'm scared to watch Rosewood now though. i may go angry Black on somebody.

My hubby and I joke about the way she says the N-word (scene where she says it was a black man to save her butt). But, that movie pisses me off so. I don't think I have watched that movie since 99. It's so powerful.

has never seen this movie (or roots for that matter) but swears by ray. i STILL havent seen ray but i tell him that i still think malcolm shits on ray. hes not trying to hear me tho.

---------------------------------------

http://twitter.com/malael

Your opinions will be more valid

Is it with the film making or details Spike added or left out of Macolm's life?


!sig!
www.myspace.com/gemini2one
http://groups.myspace.com/snakesonplane

"I noticed your CD for .99 cent, what,
blanks CDs are a dollar fifty, you'd make more if you shut the fuck up!" - Chino XL

...blanchard did a were great.

Those who had a problem with the movie have a problem with Spike. They hate Spike. Thus, there are flaws in the movie. Plus, the central figure of the movie, Malcolm X still to this day, doesn't sit well with a lot of folks.

<--- we've got bush!

>Those who had a problem with the movie have a problem with
>Spike. They hate Spike. Thus, there are flaws in the movie.

that's just not true. i know people who are big fans of Spike that just don't care that much for X.

>>Those who had a problem with the movie have a problem with
>>Spike. They hate Spike. Thus, there are flaws in the movie.
>
>that's just not true. i know people who are big fans of Spike
>that just don't care that much for X.

"Spike" directed it, it is always nitpicked. You cannot find fault with this movie. Its too good. Its a masterpiece.

<--- we've got bush!

>You cannot find
>fault with this movie. Its too good. Its a masterpiece.

is just silly.

the fact that the early years feel like a cartoon. Also, the original script was written by James Baldwin and Spike basically threw away everything nuanced about it that gave Malcolm real humanity. Baldwin's estate had his name removed from the films credits.

"The necessity of creating a pious "official" (i.e., middle-class) portrait squeezes out too many aspects of Malcolm's varied experience and mercurial intelligence; even at 199 minutes, this often feels like a skim job. But if you're too lazy to read the book, you probably should see this." - Jonathan Rosenbaum.

_
http://youtube.com/watch?v=4TztqYaemt0
http://preptimeposse.blogspot.com/

Is there a script around?

Mech

complaining about the ending sequence...the "I am Malcolm X" part....but like it was said before, the sharpest criticisms pointed toward Spike himself, not necessarily the film

----------------------------------------------------------------
respect the gift.

So there is no way to judge them separately.

Mech

and the ending with the kids kills it for me, that shoulda been an extra

but I think it's definitely a solid movie despite it's flaws, and it kind of........endearing I guess, because of it's flaws

that he chose to leave out some very, very critical elements that point to the source of the most likely true source of Malcolm's murder and Malcolm's importance (to us) and the threat and danger that he represented to the imperialist powers in the world.

Malcolm was nearly poisoned to death while he was in Egypt and he was also denied entry into the French Embassy. Needless to say, these incidents were not the works of the NOI.

Why leave those 2 facts out, but dedicate 15 - 20 minutes of film time to jitterbug dancing? Where's your focus and your priorities? Which is more important and which would give the viewer a greater understanding on the importance of MX and the impact that he truly had/was having/ and would have had on the world.

Overall, I thought the film was decent, but Spike dropped the ball at some serious intervals, and that can not be denied.

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

>that he chose to leave out some very, very critical elements
>that point to the source of the most likely true source of
>Malcolm's murder and Malcolm's importance (to us) and the
>threat and danger that he represented to the imperialist
>powers in the world.

To Spike Lee's credit I think that he was following an existing script and esp. Haley's autobiography/story.

Also see #44.

>Malcolm was nearly poisoned to death while he was in Egypt and
>he was also denied entry into the French Embassy. Needless to
>say, these incidents were not the works of the NOI.

Somewhere above I mentioned COINTELPRO and this includes other imperialist countries.

>Why leave those 2 facts out, but dedicate 15 - 20 minutes of
>film time to jitterbug dancing?

It's Hollywood. The studio wanted to shut the production down from the very beginning.

>Where's your focus and your
>priorities? Which is more important and which would give the
>viewer a greater understanding on the importance of MX and the
>impact that he truly had/was having/ and would have had on the
>world.

IMO there's no way Lee would have been able to bring such a film to mainstream audiences. I think it fair to say that the film really only covered his early years, his transition and transformation from NOI to true Islam, and the strain he was under up until his death. I agree that Lee only danced around the edges of what Shabazz could have become but it was a strategy that got the movie made and distributed commercially.

>Overall, I thought the film was decent, but Spike dropped the
>ball at some serious intervals, and that can not be denied.

True.

BTW - I wasn't just sobbing because he was going to be killed. I was thinking about what we really lost when he was killed.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

>To Spike Lee's credit I think that he was following an
>existing script and esp. Haley's autobiography/story.
>
It was in MX's autobiography (as told to Alex Haley) that I learned about the bigger forces that were moving on Malcolm. I can't give Spike a pass for leaving this out, I'm sorry. Too many minds that are all too often influenced by movies and believe in movies and will NEVER read the book or do any independent research on their own, were/are at stake. And he didn't give the people The Truth on this one; instead he misled.



>Also see #44.
>
>>Malcolm was nearly poisoned to death while he was in Egypt
>and
>>he was also denied entry into the French Embassy. Needless
>to
>>say, these incidents were not the works of the NOI.
>
>Somewhere above I mentioned COINTELPRO and this includes other
>imperialist countries.

Yes, YOU mentioned. But Spike didn't deal with this element of MX and his assassination properly. I can't give Spike credit for what you did/mentioned.

>
>>Why leave those 2 facts out, but dedicate 15 - 20 minutes of
>>film time to jitterbug dancing?
>
>It's Hollywood. The studio wanted to shut the production down
>from the very beginning.
>
>>Where's your focus and your
>>priorities? Which is more important and which would give
>the
>>viewer a greater understanding on the importance of MX and
>the
>>impact that he truly had/was having/ and would have had on
>the
>>world.
>
>IMO there's no way Lee would have been able to bring such a
>film to mainstream audiences.

Why not? Oliver Stone was able to do some serious, real, and truthful finger pointing in his film on JFK?

I think it fair to say that the
>film really only covered his early years, his transition and
>transformation from NOI to true Islam, and the strain he was
>under up until his death. I agree that Lee only danced around
>the edges of what Shabazz could have become but it was a
>strategy that got the movie made and distributed
>commercially.

For that reason, I was and still am apprehensive about this film's release. Malcolm was (and to the extent that he hasn't been completely co-opted) a revolutionary ICON to the nth degree and that is nothing to play with. He meant something to alot of people and the commericializaiton of his life and legacy through this film has taken a lot from that.


>

>BTW - I wasn't just sobbing because he was going to be killed.
> I was thinking about what we really lost when he was killed.

True enough, the film was good for generating emotions.

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

>And he
>didn't give the people The Truth on this one; instead he
>misled.

No, I misled is not the word that comes to mind. Spike Lee told the story through his lens/filter. He stepped up and went against Hollywood to get the movie made. He also made an appeal to rich Black folks to make sure the film stayed in production.

I don't see Lee as a person who could have done what Oliver Stone did with JFK. Plus, there were consequences for Stone after JFK came out. The film generated intense controversy when it was released with many critics accusing Stone of making up alot of facts. It cast doubt in the public eye for JFK...and his more recent films.

>Yes, YOU mentioned. But Spike didn't deal with this element
>of MX and his assassination properly. I can't give Spike
>credit for what you did/mentioned.

Understood.

>For that reason, I was and still am apprehensive about this
>film's release. Malcolm was (and to the extent that he hasn't
>been completely co-opted) a revolutionary ICON to the nth
>degree and that is nothing to play with. He meant something
>to alot of people and the commericializaiton of his life and
>legacy through this film has taken a lot from that.

The same can be said for Che Guevara. I have my fingers crossed for Guerrilla with Benicio Del Toro but I also have my doubts.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

>>And he
>>didn't give the people The Truth on this one; instead he
>>misled.
>
>No, I misled is not the word that comes to mind. Spike Lee
>told the story through his lens/filter. He stepped up and
>went against Hollywood to get the movie made. He also made an
>appeal to rich Black folks to make sure the film stayed in
>production.
>

Huh? I don't know how you misled when Spike made the movie.


>I don't see Lee as a person who could have done what Oliver
>Stone did with JFK. Plus, there were consequences for Stone
>after JFK came out.

There are always consequences for telling The Truth. Don't believe me, ask Malcolm X, ask Dr. ML King, ask Steven Biko, etc...

The film generated intense controversy
>when it was released with many critics accusing Stone of
>making up alot of facts. It cast doubt in the public eye for
>JFK...and his more recent films.

Unfortunately, that is one of the consequences to living in a society that we live in today; The Truth is often viewed as controversial and often met with great opposition. "Casting doubt" i.e., bringing one's credibility into question, is one of the main tools used by the powers that be to neutralize and/or nullify any Truth that one may be revealing that is pullin' the covers off the top of the dirty deeds that occur out of view for most of us.

>
>>Yes, YOU mentioned. But Spike didn't deal with this element
>>of MX and his assassination properly. I can't give Spike
>>credit for what you did/mentioned.
>
>Understood.
>
>>For that reason, I was and still am apprehensive about this
>>film's release. Malcolm was (and to the extent that he
>hasn't
>>been completely co-opted) a revolutionary ICON to the nth
>>degree and that is nothing to play with. He meant something
>>to alot of people and the commericializaiton of his life and
>>legacy through this film has taken a lot from that.
>
>The same can be said for Che Guevara. I have my fingers
>crossed for Guerrilla with Benicio Del Toro but I also have my
>doubts.

Then you see my point.

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

>Huh? I don't know how you misled when Spike made the movie.

My point was that I don't think it was Lee's intention to mislead people. He's an "artist" and produced art/his interpretation.

>There are always consequences for telling The Truth. Don't
>believe me, ask Malcolm X, ask Dr. ML King, ask Steven Biko,
>etc...

Oh, I know this already.

>>The same can be said for Che Guevara. I have my fingers
>>crossed for Guerrilla with Benicio Del Toro but I also have
>my
>>doubts.
>
>Then you see my point.

Sure.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

>>Huh? I don't know how you misled when Spike made the
>movie.
>
>My point was that I don't think it was Lee's intention to
>mislead people. He's an "artist" and produced art/his
>interpretation.
>

Where did he mislead the people? 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.

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.

Spike can't win with the critics. 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

<--- we've got bush!

>>>Huh? I don't know how you misled when Spike made the
>>movie.
>>
>>My point was that I don't think it was Lee's intention to
>>mislead people. He's an "artist" and produced art/his
>>interpretation.
>>
>
>Where did he mislead the people?

The misleading part is where he casually and not so subtley (sp?) allowed the finger to pointed at other Black ppl as being responsible for the murder of MX. This contributes more to the old divide and conquer tactic.

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.

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.


>
>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.


>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.


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.

>
>

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

>>>>Huh? I don't know how you misled when Spike made the
>>>movie.
>>>
>>>My point was that I don't think it was Lee's intention to
>>>mislead people. He's an "artist" and produced art/his
>>>interpretation.
>>>
>>
>>Where did he mislead the people?
>
>The misleading part is where he casually and not so subtley
>(sp?) allowed the finger to pointed at other Black ppl as
>being responsible for the murder of MX. This contributes more
>to the old divide and conquer tactic.
>

No it doesn't it all. You are fishing. Did you notice the people following him when he travelled overseas in the movie? Or were they just two arbitrary white guys sent by NOI? Come on. Or how about the phone tapping of his phones by these 2 white guys in the movie? Or the part where Malcolm says "its more than just the Nation...".

Divide and conquer? Did the Nation *not* want Malcolm dead? Answer that question? Did Elijah Muhammad junior *no* say he want to cut out Malcolm's toungue and send it to his father? Was the FBI, NYPD, CIA involved? Yes. John Ali was an informant. But they exploited an already existing relationship in which the Nation wanted Malcolm dead. They made attempts on his life and firebombed his house all over nothing but jealousy. 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.


>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.

>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.

>
>>
>>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?

>
>>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

>
>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.

>>
>>
>

<--- we've got bush!

>No it doesn't it all. You are fishing. Did you notice the
>people following him when he travelled overseas in the movie?
>Or were they just two arbitrary white guys sent by NOI? Come
>on. Or how about the phone tapping of his phones by these 2
>white guys in the movie? Or the part where Malcolm says "its
>more than just the Nation...".

I was just about to mention this. ^

>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.

Sadly, I believe this. It makes me angry.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

>
>No it doesn't it all. You are fishing. Did you notice the
>people following him when he travelled overseas in the movie?
>Or were they just two arbitrary white guys sent by NOI? Come
>on. Or how about the phone tapping of his phones by these 2
>white guys in the movie? Or the part where Malcolm says "its
>more than just the Nation...".
>
Yes, I noticed those guys following MX and who can forget the agents listening in to MX speak to his wife and comment that he's a saint compared to King.

So what????? Indicating that the CIA may've been following Malcolm and showing that the FBI was listening to his phone conversations does not reveal the extent to which U.S. Intelligence agencies were involved in Malcolm's murder. It doesn't even come close to disclosing their involvement. It just makes them look like some nosey motherfuckers, akin to Mrs. Cravitts on Bewitched, instead low-down, deceitful murdering sons-of-bitches. Anyone who walks away with the former view of the CIA and FBI in Malcolm's death as opposed to the latter view is a problem to me. But if you have no problem with it, that's on you.


>Divide and conquer? Did the Nation *not* want Malcolm dead?
>Answer that question? Did Elijah Muhammad junior *no* say he
>want to cut out Malcolm's toungue and send it to his father?
>Was the FBI, NYPD, CIA involved? Yes. John Ali was an
>informant. But they exploited an already existing relationship
>in which the Nation wanted Malcolm dead.

I can't speak to individuals, but I know that the official word from Elijah Muhammad was to leave Malcolm alone. It is well known that the organization had more than its fair share of zealots who were unhappy with Malcolm, 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.


They made attempts on
>his life and firebombed his house all over nothing but
>jealousy.

Who are you saying bombed his house? The NOI? How do you know this? If you know for certain who bombed his house, I'd like for you to go one better for me and Inbox me the next big pay Lotto numbers.


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. 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. It is the result of centuries of outside forces conditioning us and influencing us. I acknowledge that.

At the same time, I can not turn a blind eye and ignore when we have been deliberately and blatantly been fucked with. Malcolm's murder was the result one of these instances of us being deliberately and blatantly being fucked with by outsiders who obviously did not and do not have our best interest at heart.


>
>
>>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. 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.


>>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. What makes you think that the hostility towards Malcolm was purely jealousy and envy as if there were no other issues involved? You've been watching this comfounded movie too much.

>>
>>>
>>>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.

>
>>
>>>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. 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.




>>
>>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. And I guess that's where I differ with you and most: If given a choice between watching this movie or watching a documentary on Malcom, I will ALWAYS select the documentary.

>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

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

>I can't speak to individuals, but I know that the official
>word from Elijah Muhammad was to leave Malcolm alone. It is
>well known that the organization had more than its fair share
>of zealots who were unhappy with Malcolm, 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.

I'll jump in and say that another thing about the NOI at that time was that Elijah Muhammad's health was failing. He was no longer able to speak for the organization and keep an eye on activities within the Nation. This was also shown in the film.

My colleagues grandfather was in the Audobon ballroom at the time of Shabazz' death and she told me that everyone there saw who killed him. COINTELPRO may have been behind the murder but the people with the guns were Black...from No. 25 in Newark.

>Who are you saying bombed his house? The NOI? How do you
>know this?

I tend to go with what Malcolm X said publicly about it.

>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.

Who isn't flawed? I also don't believe that there is a chip that makes us unable to make progress. I do believe that there is conditioning and that is something that can be dealt with.

>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. It is the
>result of centuries of outside forces conditioning us and
>influencing us. I acknowledge that.

However, I believe that at the time of Shabazz' death the NOI was co-opted and corrupt...from the top down. This has nothing to do with Black people.

>At the same time, I can not turn a blind eye and ignore when
>we have been deliberately and blatantly been fucked with.
>Malcolm's murder was the result one of these instances of us
>being deliberately and blatantly being fucked with by
>outsiders who obviously did not and do not have our best
>interest at heart.

Yes but some Black folks chose to go along. It was a choice just as Malcolm X chose to leave the NOI and become a true Muslim.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

>>I can't speak to individuals, but I know that the official
>>word from Elijah Muhammad was to leave Malcolm alone. It is
>>well known that the organization had more than its fair
>share
>>of zealots who were unhappy with Malcolm, 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.
>
>I'll jump in and say that another thing about the NOI at that
>time was that Elijah Muhammad's health was failing. He was no
>longer able to speak for the organization and keep an eye on
>activities within the Nation. This was also shown in the
>film.
>

E.M.'s health had been an issue for a long time but it didn't stop him from commanding his position as leader of the N.O.I. As a matter of fact, he was around for 10 years after Malcolm was assassinated. Does that sound like a man who had wittled away to nothing? I know, I know..."but the movie showed Elijah Muhammad coughing and looking real bad so I assumed..." I understand.


>My colleagues grandfather was in the Audobon ballroom at the
>time of Shabazz' death and she told me that everyone there saw
>who killed him. COINTELPRO may have been behind the murder
>but the people with the guns were Black...from No. 25 in
>Newark.
>

The people who pulled the trigger WERE Black and I never said that they were not. But I'ma let you in on a secret sis. *leans closer* You listening? *whisper begins* The FBI recruits and hires Black people to obtain information from Black people and to disrupt positive, progressive activities of Black organizations. *whisper ends*

So yes, Black people were the puppets that were seen pulling the trigger, but who was the puppeteer?

Did you know that out of the 5 guys who were seen conducting the assassination of Malcolm X, only one guy actually stood trial for Malcolm's murder. Actually, 3 stood trial, but only one (i.e., Talmadge Hayer) was actually an assassin. The other 2 who were standing trial, as Hayer testified, were not even at the Audobon the day Malcolm was killed. But they were standing trial for Malcolm's death. What happened to the other 4 men? Note: initially, it was reported that 5 men were involved in Malcolm's assassination, but only 3 stood trial and out of thos 3, only one had anything to do with the assassination. What do you think of that?

If 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.

Sis. please note that I am courteous and thoughtful enough to provide references for my position, unlike SOME posters who just say, "Do the research", but don't provide any references at all. (Honestly, that makes me wonder if they know what the hell they are talking about).

>>Who are you saying bombed his house? The NOI? How do you
>>know this?
>
>I tend to go with what Malcolm X said publicly about it.

Well, that's fine; but honestly Malcolm didn't fully know at the time how heavy he was being watched nor did he understand the extent to which the imperialist forces were making moves on him. It may've seemed most apparent that it was the N.O.I. because they had the public beef, but Malcolm really didn't know how badly the US and the (former) colonial powers wanted him eliminated.

It may've been some members of the Nation, it may not have been. Who knows? I know that I don't; I'm sure that Malcolm didn't really know; he just suspected.



>
>>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.
>
>Who isn't flawed? I also don't believe that there is a chip
>that makes us unable to make progress. I do believe that
>there is conditioning and that is something that can be dealt
>with.

Sis. that conditioning that you're speaking of is what some refer to as "the Willie Lynch chip". I personally don't believe in the story of Willie Lynch giving a speech to slave masters some 300 years ago that gave them all the secrets to keeping negroes down. But that conditioning you speak of is the same as "the chip" to which I was referring.


>
>>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. It is the
>>result of centuries of outside forces conditioning us and
>>influencing us. I acknowledge that.
>
>However, I believe that at the time of Shabazz' death the NOI
>was co-opted and corrupt...from the top down. This has
>nothing to do with Black people.
>

Maybe so; hell, probably so. But to what extent this courruption was prevealent and manifesting itself is the question.


>>At the same time, I can not turn a blind eye and ignore when
>>we have been deliberately and blatantly been fucked with.
>>Malcolm's murder was the result one of these instances of us
>>being deliberately and blatantly being fucked with by
>>outsiders who obviously did not and do not have our best
>>interest at heart.
>
>Yes but some Black folks chose to go along. It was a choice
>just as Malcolm X chose to leave the NOI and become a true
>Muslim.

Honestly, Malcolm didn't "chose to leave the NOI", he was put out or should I say constructively removed from the orgainzation. I don't like that he was put out, but that's how it went down (I know, I know, I know...the movie didn't present it like that, right? But that was actually the case.

I don't know what this "true Muslim" talk is about. What makes what some damn Arabs have more valid than the means of religious expression that Black people have?

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

>E.M.'s health had been an issue for a long time but it didn't
>stop him from commanding his position as leader of the N.O.I.

I mentioned above that one of my mentors was in the NOI and left when Shabazz was murdered. By that time Muhammad was a figurehead and, yes, you can whittle to nothing in 10 years or more. I've seen that firsthand.

>The people who pulled the trigger WERE Black and I never said
>that they were not. But I'ma let you in on a secret sis.
>*leans closer* You listening? *whisper begins* The FBI
>recruits and hires Black people to obtain information from
>Black people and to disrupt positive, progressive activities
>of Black organizations. *whisper ends*

No need to whisper. I already mentioned COINTELPRO.

>So yes, Black people were the puppets that were seen pulling
>the trigger, but who was the puppeteer?

So are you denying that some of the assassins were not from No. 25?

>Note: initially, it was reported that 5 men were
>involved in Malcolm's assassination, but only 3 stood trial
>and out of thos 3, only one had anything to do with the
>assassination. What do you think of that?

Like a witness protection program it was part of the deal.

>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

Well, here's a couple for you:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/71838.stm

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/9929,noel,7168,5.html

Very fishy.

>Well, that's fine; but honestly Malcolm didn't fully know at
>the time how heavy he was being watched nor did he understand
>the extent to which the imperialist forces were making moves
>on him.

I disagree. He KNEW. Even Betty Shabazz knew.

>Maybe so; hell, probably so. But to what extent this
>courruption was prevealent and manifesting itself is the
>question.

My mentor was a teenager in the NOI at the time of Shabazz' death. He claims even he knew what was up and that was why he left. He showed me documents to prove his case, too.

>Honestly, Malcolm didn't "chose to leave the NOI", he was put
>out or should I say constructively removed from the
>orgainzation.

Shabazz was silenced for a time but not put out. He left because I do believe he knew he was destined to take the cause to the global stage...and he became aware of corruption within the NOI.

>I don't know what this "true Muslim" talk is about. What
>makes what some damn Arabs have more valid than the means of
>religious expression that Black people have?

From http://www.colostate.edu/Orgs/MSA/find_more/m_x.html:

"On March 12, 1964, impelled by internal jealousy within the Nation of Islam and revelations of Elijah Muhammad's sexual immorality, Malcolm left the Nation of Islam with the intention of starting his own organization:

I feel like a man who has been asleep somewhat and under someone else's control. I feel what I'm thinking and saying now is for myself. Before, it was for and by guidance of another, now I think with my own mind.

Malcolm was thirty-eight years old when he left Elijah Muhammad's Nation of Islam. Reflecting on reflects that occurred prior to leaving, he said:

At one or another college or university, usually in the informal gatherings after I had spoken, perhaps a dozen generally white-complexioned people would come up to me, identifying themselves as Arabian, Middle Eastern or North African Muslims who happened to be visiting, studying, or living in the United States. They had said to me that, my white-indicting statements notwithstanding, they felt I was sincere in considering myself a Muslim -- and they felt if I was exposed to what they always called "true Islam," I would "understand it, and embrace it." Automatically, as a follower of Elijah, I had bridled whenever this was said. But in the privacy of my own thoughts after several of these experiences, I did question myself: if one was sincere in professing a religion, why should he balk at broadening his knowledge of that religion?

Those orthodox Muslims whom I had met, one after another, had urged me to meet and talk with a Dr. Mahmoud Youssef Shawarbi. . . . Then one day Dr. Shawarbi and I were introduced by a newspaperman. He was cordial. He said he had followed me in the press; I said I had been told of him, and we talked for fifteen or twenty minutes. We both had to leave to make appointments we had, when he dropped on me something whose logic never would get out of my head. He said, "No man has believed perfectly until he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself."

...

"The pilgrimage to Mecca, known as the Hajj, is a religious obligation that every orthodox Muslim fulfills, if able, at least once in his or her lifetime.

The Holy Quran says it, "Pilgrimage to the House is a duty men owe to God; those who are able, make the journey." (3: 97)

Allah said: "And proclaim the pilgrimage among men; they will come to you on foot and upon each lean camel, they will come from every deep ravine" (22:27).

Every one of the thousands at the airport, about to leave for Jeddah, was dressed this way. You could be a king or a peasant and no on e would know. Some powerful personages, who were discreetly pointed out to me, had on the same thing I had on. Once thus dressed, we all had begun intermittently calling out "Labbayka! (Allahumma) Labbayka!" (Here I come, O Lord!) Packed in the plane were white, black, brown, red, and yellow people, blue eyes and blond hair, and my kinky red hair -- all together, brothers! All honoring the same God, all in turn giving equal honor to each other. . . ."

Thus true Muslims take the pilgrimage to Mecca, according to the Quran and meet in fellowship with other Musilms there to practice the rituals detailed in the Holy Book.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

>
>I mentioned above that one of my mentors was in the NOI and
>left when Shabazz was murdered. By that time Muhammad was a
>figurehead and, yes, you can whittle to nothing in 10 years or
>more. I've seen that firsthand.
>

Your response here is kinda misleading because in the previous post you declared "at that time" (I'm assuming that you meant the time that Malcolm was assassinated) "Elijah Muhammad's health was failing" and of course you mentioned that the movie showed this. To which I responded that his health was not that big of an issue that you were making it out to be because he commanded the NOI as its leader for 10 years after MX's assassination, and not that he had whittled away to nothing in 10 years; that's not what I was saying at all. I was saying that he had not whittled away to nothing at the time of MX's assassination.

Also, if E.M. was a figurehead, who was the actual leader during this time?


>>The people who pulled the trigger WERE Black and I never
>said
>>that they were not. But I'ma let you in on a secret sis.
>>*leans closer* You listening? *whisper begins* The FBI
>>recruits and hires Black people to obtain information from
>>Black people and to disrupt positive, progressive activities
>>of Black organizations. *whisper ends*
>
>No need to whisper. I already mentioned COINTELPRO.
>

Mentioning an organization and telling on them is 2 different things.


>>So yes, Black people were the puppets that were seen pulling
>>the trigger, but who was the puppeteer?
>
>So are you denying that some of the assassins were not from
>No. 25?

This is also misleading because you typed the question in the form of a double negative. So I will re-type the question the way that I think you meant to ask it, and you can let me know whether my re-phrasing is accurate or inaccurate.

"So are you denying that some of the assassins were from
No. 25?"

Ok. Pay attention real closely, because I thought that I was making this clear before but apparently not. Some of the assassins may've been from Mosque # 25, some of them may not have been. Talmadge Hayer I believe was from mosque # 25, so at least he was one that I would have to say yes to. But no one knows where the other assassins were from because they never stood trial and were never brougt to justice. They supposedly "just disappered", I guess. No one at the Audobon that day ever knowingly saw these guys again. The other 2 men that stood trial with Talmadge Hayer did not particpate in MX's at assassination and were not even at the Audobon that day that MX was assassinated.

The unknown/unfound assassins may've been from Mosque # 25 but they were not of Mosque # 25; they were of the FBI. The FBI would send FBI agents (in this case, Black agents) to infiltrate organizations that they considered a "threat to National security". By joining these organizations, the FBI was able to keep a close eye on the activities of these organizations and disrupt things (if it was thought to be necessary) and cause confusion, above all else.

I believe yo' boy Jambone has acknowledged that one of E.M.'s top aids, John Ali, served as the NOI's secretary, all the while he was on the FBI's payroll. This was done to the NOI, the Black Panthers, the US organization, Garvey's UNIA movement, you name the organization, if they were looking to make some serious moves on the behalf of Black people, they were infiltrated.


>
>>Note: initially, it was reported that 5 men were
>>involved in Malcolm's assassination, but only 3 stood trial
>>and out of thos 3, only one had anything to do with the
>>assassination. What do you think of that?
>
>Like a witness protection program it was part of the deal.
>

No, it wasn't part of the deal; IT WAS PART OF THE JOB. No need for them to hang around there anymore, their work was done (i.e., MX was dead and confusion, fingerpointing, and misblaming was abound concerning who was responsible for his death) so time to move on to the next assignment.

>
>Well, here's a couple for you:
>
>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/71838.stm
>
>http://www.villagevoice.com/news/9929,noel,7168,5.html
>
>Very fishy.
>

Fishy, huh? What I got out of those links is that Farrakhan gave a leadership position in the NOI to a man who was wrongly convicted for the death of MX. Abdul Aziz (then Norman Butler) stood trial for the murder of MX and was convicted but he wasn't even at the Audobon that day. That day, he had gone to the hospital for a doctor's appt. for treatment for his injured leg, which was confirmed by witnesses and hospital records. But yet, he was still convicted of MX's assassination.


>>Well, that's fine; but honestly Malcolm didn't fully know at
>>the time how heavy he was being watched nor did he
>understand
>>the extent to which the imperialist forces were making moves
>>on him.
>
>I disagree. He KNEW. Even Betty Shabazz knew.
>

You can disagree all you want. Malcolm couldn't prove it; Betty couldn't prove it; and you can't prove. The only thing anyone can do is have suspicions and make accusations, but no one can prove anything so no one really knows.


>>Maybe so; hell, probably so. But to what extent this
>>courruption was prevealent and manifesting itself is the
>>question.
>
>My mentor was a teenager in the NOI at the time of Shabazz'
>death. He claims even he knew what was up and that was why he
>left. He showed me documents to prove his case, too.
>

What documents did he show you? What was the source of these documents?

>>Honestly, Malcolm didn't "chose to leave the NOI", he was
>put
>>out or should I say constructively removed from the
>>orgainzation.
>
>Shabazz was silenced for a time but not put out. He left
>because I do believe he knew he was destined to take the cause
>to the global stage...and he became aware of corruption within
>the NOI.
>

As I said, he was "constructively" put out. He wasn't told to leave, but by silencing a man like Malcolm and not allowing him to have a leadership position in the organization that he helped to grow, is just as good as putting him out, i.e., constructively put out.


>>I don't know what this "true Muslim" talk is about. What
>>makes what some damn Arabs have more valid than the means of
>>religious expression that Black people have?
>
>From http://www.colostate.edu/Orgs/MSA/find_more/m_x.html:
>
>"On March 12, 1964, impelled by internal jealousy within the
>Nation of Islam and revelations of Elijah Muhammad's sexual
>immorality, Malcolm left the Nation of Islam with the
>intention of starting his own organization:
>
> I feel like a man who has been asleep somewhat and under
>someone else's control. I feel what I'm thinking and saying
>now is for myself. Before, it was for and by guidance of
>another, now I think with my own mind.

First of all, E.M. identified these women as his wives and he took care of them and their children as such (one of these women, Tynetta Muhammad and her son, Ishmael (also, E.M.'s son), hold leadership positions in the Nation to this very day). MX knew about this so-called immorality when he was on silent probation and was trying to get back into an active position in the NOI. So for him to claim to be leaving because of some "sexual immorality" sounds suspect to me.

>
>Malcolm was thirty-eight years old when he left Elijah
>Muhammad's Nation of Islam. Reflecting on reflects that
>occurred prior to leaving, he said:
>
> At one or another college or university, usually in the
>informal gatherings after I had spoken, perhaps a dozen
>generally white-complexioned people would come up to me,
>identifying themselves as Arabian, Middle Eastern or North
>African Muslims who happened to be visiting, studying, or
>living in the United States. They had said to me that, my
>white-indicting statements notwithstanding, they felt I was
>sincere in considering myself a Muslim -- and they felt if I
>was exposed to what they always called "true Islam," I would
>"understand it, and embrace it." Automatically, as a follower
>of Elijah, I had bridled whenever this was said. But in the
>privacy of my own thoughts after several of these experiences,
>I did question myself: if one was sincere in professing a
>religion, why should he balk at broadening his knowledge of
>that religion?
>
> Those orthodox Muslims whom I had met, one after another,
>had urged me to meet and talk with a Dr. Mahmoud Youssef
>Shawarbi. . . . Then one day Dr. Shawarbi and I were
>introduced by a newspaperman. He was cordial. He said he had
>followed me in the press; I said I had been told of him, and
>we talked for fifteen or twenty minutes. We both had to leave
>to make appointments we had, when he dropped on me something
>whose logic never would get out of my head. He said, "No man
>has believed perfectly until he wishes for his brother what he
>wishes for himself."
>
>Thus true Muslims take the pilgrimage to Mecca, according to
>the Quran and meet in fellowship with other Musilms there to
>practice the rituals detailed in the Holy Book.

Okay, I know the pilgrimage to Mecca is a requirement of Muslims in the NOI if it is within their means.

Secondly, this wasn't Malcolm's first time seeing white Muslims. He made a trip to the so-called Middle East years before the 1964 trip and unless all the white Muslims had left town that day, it is likely he saw white Muslims and knew that there white Muslims existed.

Thirdly, I refuse to believe that MX was naive enough to believe in this ritual meaning much of anything. As often as he spoke of the hypocrisy of white Christians(preaching brotherhood on Sunday, but never really putting it into any real practice), I'm sure he was insightful enough to not be fooled by a ritual (i.e., Hajj) that is based in peace and brotherhood.

And lastly, I assume that you believe the NOI should practice a non-race prejudiced based Islam like the Islamic Arabs enslaving and committing all kinds of abuses and atrocities against Black Afrikans in the Sudan.

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

>I was saying
>that he had not whittled away to nothing at the time of MX's
>assassination.

Check this out: http://www.ink19.com/issues/april2003/printReviews/evolutionOfNationOf.html

"Elijah Muhammad was only the figurehead of the Nation of Islam. His ability to shape the evolution of the Nation was quite limited, and his ideology quickly became stagnant. Thus, it is no wonder that when Malcolm X disavowed Muhammad's ideological tunnel vision, many left the Nation with him."

>Also, if E.M. was a figurehead, who was the actual leader
>during this time?

Not leader but leaders. There were plenty of spokesmen/leaders speaking on behalf of Elijah Muhammad at the time of Shabazz' death.

>Mentioning an organization and telling on them is 2 different
>things.

I provided a link...people can read.

>>>So yes, Black people were the puppets that were seen
>pulling
>>>the trigger, but who was the puppeteer?
>>
>>So are you denying that some of the assassins were not from
>>No. 25?
>
>This is also misleading because you typed the question in the
>form of a double negative. So I will re-type the question the
>way that I think you meant to ask it, and you can let me know
>whether my re-phrasing is accurate or inaccurate.

There was no need to re-type anything. You knew what I meant.

>Some of the
>assassins may've been from Mosque # 25, some of them may not
>have been. Talmadge Hayer I believe was from mosque # 25, so
>at least he was one that I would have to say yes to.

No. 25 was involved. NOI do not do anything without a directive. Even if they had been working for the FBI they could not have just acted on their own. My point is that the assassins were getting directives from the FBI and NOI. It was the same directive.

This reminds me of a time some "spies" from a local newspaper signed up for classes at a new center where I was director. The newspaper had previous published some damaging articles about the org and I told my supervisors that I thought they were plants. Sure enough the paper published another negative article but praised the new center. The plants disappeared. I learned a lot from that experience...about politics and the b.s. people will do to maintain a status quo.

>>Like a witness protection program it was part of the deal.
>>
>
>No, it wasn't part of the deal; IT WAS PART OF THE JOB. No
>need for them to hang around there anymore, their work was
>done (i.e., MX was dead and confusion, fingerpointing, and
>misblaming was abound concerning who was responsible for his
>death) so time to move on to the next assignment.

There was plenty of chaos before he died and it continued afterwards.

>Fishy, huh? What I got out of those links is that Farrakhan
>gave a leadership position in the NOI to a man who was wrongly
>convicted for the death of MX. Abdul Aziz (then Norman
>Butler) stood trial for the murder of MX and was convicted but
>he wasn't even at the Audobon that day. That day, he had gone
>to the hospital for a doctor's appt. for treatment for his
>injured leg, which was confirmed by witnesses and hospital
>records. But yet, he was still convicted of MX's
>assassination.

And that's not fishy?

>You can disagree all you want. Malcolm couldn't prove it;
>Betty couldn't prove it; and you can't prove. The only thing
>anyone can do is have suspicions and make accusations, but no
>one can prove anything so no one really knows.

After talking with my colleague whose family was at the Audobon when Shabazz was murdered it was clear that any voices that could prove anything were silenced out of fear. My "boy" jambone just posted an excellent video that just touches on that fear. You should check it out.

>What documents did he show you? What was the source of these
>documents?

Some publications within the NOI at the time and right after Shabazz' death.

>First of all, E.M. identified these women as his wives and he
>took care of them and their children as such (one of these
>women, Tynetta Muhammad and her son, Ishmael (also, E.M.'s
>son), hold leadership positions in the Nation to this very
>day). MX knew about this so-called immorality when he was on
>silent probation and was trying to get back into an active
>position in the NOI. So for him to claim to be leaving
>because of some "sexual immorality" sounds suspect to me.

Well, in this country what Muhammad did is immoral AND illegal. Ask the Mormons.

>Okay, I know the pilgrimage to Mecca is a requirement of
>Muslims in the NOI if it is within their means.

Man, it is more than just the haijj (that was an example). There are plenty of requirements for folks who truly follow Islam that is not a requirement in the NOI.

>Secondly, this wasn't Malcolm's first time seeing white
>Muslims. He made a trip to the so-called Middle East years
>before the 1964 trip and unless all the white Muslims had left
>town that day, it is likely he saw white Muslims and knew that
>there white Muslims existed.

I think what Shabazz was saying was that it all came together for him during the haijj.

>Thirdly, I refuse to believe that MX was naive enough to
>believe in this ritual meaning much of anything.

WTF??? What b.s. is this? Plenty of Muslims around the world take haijj very seriously.

>And lastly, I assume that you believe the NOI should practice
>a non-race prejudiced based Islam like the Islamic Arabs
>enslaving and committing all kinds of abuses and atrocities
>against Black Afrikans in the Sudan.

But you cannot generalize Islam or any religion. Corruption was everywhere. You should check out The Power of Nightmares:

"This film explores the origins in the 1940s and 50s of Islamic Fundamentalism in the Middle East, and Neoconservatism in America, parallels between these movements, and their effect on the world today. From the introduction to Part 1:

"Both were idealists who were born out of the failure of the liberal dream to build a better world. And both had a very similar explanation for what caused that failure. These two groups have changed the world, but not in the way that either intended. Together, they created today's nightmare vision of a secret, organized evil that threatens the world. A fantasy that politicians then found restored their power and authority in a disillusioned age. And those with the darkest fears became the most powerful. " The Power of Nightmares, Baby It's Cold Outside." - http://www.archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmares

BTW - I am not a Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, nor do I represent any religion or philosophy. I hate corruption and recognize that there is duality in most things. People have to make a choice.

From an excellent article about "The Power of Individual Choice". I especially liked this part:

"Individual choice is very important. There is no way one cannot choose. Each volition comes with a resulting effect. That is why it is so powerful. The world we experience is the result of what we have made collectively. Seeing this, Donna and I have begun to choose differently. We are not saying our way is "the right way" for everyone. It's only right for us, given the circumstances we find ourselves in, at this particular point in time."

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.

>>assassination.
>
>Check this out:
>http://www.ink19.com/issues/april2003/printReviews/evolutionOfNationOf.html
>
>"Elijah Muhammad was only the figurehead of the Nation of
>Islam. His ability to shape the evolution of the Nation was
>quite limited, and his ideology quickly became stagnant. Thus,
>it is no wonder that when Malcolm X disavowed Muhammad's
>ideological tunnel vision, many left the Nation with him."
>

Says who? Who is this guy? From what I can tell, this is only the opinion of a guy who is doing a book review.



>>Also, if E.M. was a figurehead, who was the actual leader
>>during this time?
>
>Not leader but leaders. There were plenty of
>spokesmen/leaders speaking on behalf of Elijah Muhammad at the
>time of Shabazz' death.
>

That is nothing new. The NOI has always had numerous individuals serving in varying capacities of leadership. But Elijah was one the one who issued the top level orders that superceded all others and were to be followed by all in the NOI. This was up until his time of death. These "leaders" took orders from Elijah just like everybody else in the NOI.

>>Mentioning an organization and telling on them is 2
>different
>>things.
>
>I provided a link...people can read.
>

Provided a link to what; to show what; to prove what?

>>>>So yes, Black people were the puppets that were seen
>>pulling
>>>>the trigger, but who was the puppeteer?
>>>
>>>So are you denying that some of the assassins were not from
>>>No. 25?
>>
>>This is also misleading because you typed the question in
>the
>>form of a double negative. So I will re-type the question
>the
>>way that I think you meant to ask it, and you can let me
>know
>>whether my re-phrasing is accurate or inaccurate.
>
>There was no need to re-type anything. You knew what I
>meant.
>
>>Some of the
>>assassins may've been from Mosque # 25, some of them may not
>>have been. Talmadge Hayer I believe was from mosque # 25,
>so
>>at least he was one that I would have to say yes to.
>
>No. 25 was involved. NOI do not do anything without a
>directive. Even if they had been working for the FBI they
>could not have just acted on their own. My point is that the
>assassins were getting directives from the FBI and NOI. It
>was the same directive.


This part extracted from the above makes me wonder if you're just saying some shit to be saying some shit, if you have any idea of what you are talking about or if just having fun at my expense:

"My point is that the assassins were getting directives from the FBI and NOI."

So do you believe that EM was deliberately and conscioulsly working with the FBI? Is that what are saying? If so, I guess that's cool. Everybody's gotta believe in something. Next thing I know you'll be telling me that you believe in Santa Claus, the tooth fairy, the Easter Bunny, and the Great Pumpkin.



>This reminds me of a time some "spies" from a local newspaper
>signed up for classes at a new center where I was director.
>The newspaper had previous published some damaging articles
>about the org and I told my supervisors that I thought they
>were plants. Sure enough the paper published another negative
>article but praised the new center. The plants disappeared.
>I learned a lot from that experience...about politics and the
>b.s. people will do to maintain a status quo.
>
>>>Like a witness protection program it was part of the deal.
>>>
>>
>>No, it wasn't part of the deal; IT WAS PART OF THE JOB. No
>>need for them to hang around there anymore, their work was
>>done (i.e., MX was dead and confusion, fingerpointing, and
>>misblaming was abound concerning who was responsible for his
>>death) so time to move on to the next assignment.
>
>There was plenty of chaos before he died and it continued
>afterwards.
>
>>Fishy, huh? What I got out of those links is that Farrakhan
>>gave a leadership position in the NOI to a man who was
>wrongly
>>convicted for the death of MX. Abdul Aziz (then Norman
>>Butler) stood trial for the murder of MX and was convicted
>but
>>he wasn't even at the Audobon that day. That day, he had
>gone
>>to the hospital for a doctor's appt. for treatment for his
>>injured leg, which was confirmed by witnesses and hospital
>>records. But yet, he was still convicted of MX's
>>assassination.
>
>And that's not fishy?
>

To hire someone; to give somone a job who hadn't done anything wrong, is that fishy to me??? Nahhhh. I guess you don't believe in hiring the innocent, huh?

>>You can disagree all you want. Malcolm couldn't prove it;
>>Betty couldn't prove it; and you can't prove. The only
>thing
>>anyone can do is have suspicions and make accusations, but
>no
>>one can prove anything so no one really knows.
>
>After talking with my colleague whose family was at the
>Audobon when Shabazz was murdered it was clear that any voices
>that could prove anything were silenced out of fear. My "boy"
>jambone just posted an excellent video that just touches on
>that fear. You should check it out.
>
>>What documents did he show you? What was the source of
>these
>>documents?
>
>Some publications within the NOI at the time and right after
>Shabazz' death.
>

Internallly generated document or old Muhammad Speaks newspapers? What?? What documents did he show you "to prove his case"?


>>First of all, E.M. identified these women as his wives and
>he
>>took care of them and their children as such (one of these
>>women, Tynetta Muhammad and her son, Ishmael (also, E.M.'s
>>son), hold leadership positions in the Nation to this very
>>day). MX knew about this so-called immorality when he was
>on
>>silent probation and was trying to get back into an active
>>position in the NOI. So for him to claim to be leaving
>>because of some "sexual immorality" sounds suspect to me.
>
>Well, in this country what Muhammad did is immoral AND
>illegal. Ask the Mormons.
>

Honestly, I don't have to ask the Mormons anything. Wait a minute...why would you want me to ask the Mormons? As far as I know, the Mormons practice polygamy. So they practice, in this country, the very same thing that E.M. was practicing. So what's your point in referencing the Mormons?

>>Okay, I know the pilgrimage to Mecca is a requirement of
>>Muslims in the NOI if it is within their means.
>
>Man, it is more than just the haijj (that was an example).
>There are plenty of requirements for folks who truly follow
>Islam that is not a requirement in the NOI.
>

You really don't know what the hell you're talking about, do you?

Below is an excerpt from Elijah Muhammad's publication, Message to the Blackman in America, in the chapter, "Islam for so-called Negroes (p. 82):

"...The main principles of action in Islam: keeping up prayer, spending in the cause of truth, fasting especially during the month of Ramadan, pilgrimage to Mecca..."


>>Secondly, this wasn't Malcolm's first time seeing white
>>Muslims. He made a trip to the so-called Middle East years
>>before the 1964 trip and unless all the white Muslims had
>left
>>town that day, it is likely he saw white Muslims and knew
>that
>>there white Muslims existed.
>
>I think what Shabazz was saying was that it all came together
>for him during the haijj.
>

What all came together for him during Hajj??

>>Thirdly, I refuse to believe that MX was naive enough to
>>believe in this ritual meaning much of anything.
>
>WTF??? What b.s. is this? Plenty of Muslims around the world
>take haijj very seriously.
>

Hajj, like many other ceremonial practices of various religions is just a ritual. It has nothing to do with how you live and practice what you preach on a daily basis. And the most common person knows that religion is not what you preach, but what you put into practice. A ritual that you may participate in, once in a lifetime (if you're lucky or financially blessed, maybe more than once), is not daily practice, needless to say.

>>And lastly, I assume that you believe the NOI should
>practice
>>a non-race prejudiced based Islam like the Islamic Arabs
>>enslaving and committing all kinds of abuses and atrocities
>>against Black Afrikans in the Sudan.
>
>But you cannot generalize Islam or any religion. Corruption
>was everywhere. You should check out The Power of Nightmares:
>

I guess you missed my point. Many try to accuse EM of not teaching "True Islam" because he based it in Blackness, and took a nationalistic approach with it. They will point out how Islamic Arabs claim that this type of teaching is not Islam. I was pointing out that many who try to take this stance against EM and the NOI need to look at how the Arabs have used Islam in a non-race based, non-nationalistic way in the Sudan with their treatment of Black people (strong sarcasm here).

I respect all religions, in theory; too bad most of 'em are not truly, properly carried out in practice.

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

>Says who? Who is this guy? From what I can tell, this is
>only the opinion of a guy who is doing a book review.

Well, that's all we have been talking about is opinions...your opinion, my opinion, NOI, Malcolm X, and so on. Opinions, i.e. positions, are only opinions. I respect some of them but I take few of them seriously.

>That is nothing new. The NOI has always had numerous
>individuals serving in varying capacities of leadership. But
>Elijah was one the one who issued the top level orders that
>superceded all others and were to be followed by all in the
>NOI. This was up until his time of death. These "leaders"
>took orders from Elijah just like everybody else in the NOI.

Is this fact or merely another opinion...in other words how do you know this to be true?

>Provided a link to what; to show what; to prove what?

COINTELPRO

"Karl Evanzz, a staff writer for the Washington Post, researched more than 300,000 pages of declassified FBI and CIA documents for his book, The Judas Factor. In its introduction he states, "After analyzing these resources, I am convinced that Louis E. Lomax, an industrious African-American journalist who befriended Malcolm X in the late 1950's, had practically solved the riddle of his assassination." He believed that Malcolm X was set up for the assassination by a former friend, John Ali, who was an agent/informer for an intelligence agency. Malcolm X had previously commented that Ali had been responsible for his ouster from the NOI. Ali eventually rose to the position of National Secretary of the NOI. Lomax was later killed in an automobile accident (due to brake failure)." - http://www.crimelibrary.com/terrorists_spies/assassins/malcolm_x/4.html

The article goes on to claim that "government and law enforcement agencies planted infiltrators in the OAAU, NOI and almost all of the other civil rights movement organizations. Some of these agent/informers were highly placed."

Now let's go back read what I wrote:
"NOI do not do anything without a directive. Even if they had been working for the FBI they could not have just acted on their own. My point is that the assassins were getting directives from the FBI and NOI. It was the same directive."

Logic would follow that directives coming from highly placed agents within the NOI would lead to a similar outcome as the very organization that planted those agents in the first place. I just don't buy that Elijah Muhammad was the only one giving directives within the NOI. Of course, this is just my opinion.

>So do you believe that EM was deliberately and conscioulsly
>working with the FBI?

See above.

>To hire someone; to give somone a job who hadn't done anything
>wrong, is that fishy to me??? Nahhhh. I guess you don't
>believe in hiring the innocent, huh?

There's still some doubt about the guy's innocence. Witnesses provided his name.

>Internallly generated document or old Muhammad Speaks
>newspapers? What?? What documents did he show you "to prove
>his case"?

He did not try to prove anything. He showed me something written by someone named Wallace and other than that I can't recall. I was 16 then...more than half my life ago. However, I do remember that he told me to take whatever I heard with a grain of salt and I do. I am not taking any positions.

>Honestly, I don't have to ask the Mormons anything. Wait a
>minute...why would you want me to ask the Mormons?

Because polygamy is illegal.

>Below is an excerpt from Elijah Muhammad's publication,
>Message to the Blackman in America, in the chapter, "Islam for
>so-called Negroes (p. 82):
>
>"...The main principles of action in Islam: keeping up
>prayer, spending in the cause of truth, fasting especially
>during the month of Ramadan, pilgrimage to Mecca..."

But why do these things? You don't just do them blindly because someone said so...do you? I don't.

>What all came together for him during Hajj??

I already posted that quote from Shabazz.

>Hajj, like many other ceremonial practices of various
>religions is just a ritual. It has nothing to do with how you
>live and practice what you preach on a daily basis.

Then that is a shame (or sham) like most religious activities IMO.

>I guess you missed my point. Many try to accuse EM of not
>teaching "True Islam" because he based it in Blackness, and
>took a nationalistic approach with it. They will point out
>how Islamic Arabs claim that this type of teaching is not
>Islam. I was pointing out that many who try to take this
>stance against EM and the NOI need to look at how the Arabs
>have used Islam in a non-race based, non-nationalistic way in
>the Sudan with their treatment of Black people (strong sarcasm
>here).

Okay.

>I respect all religions, in theory; too bad most of 'em are
>not truly, properly carried out in practice.

I agree, esp. that religion and politics are horrible bedfellows.

<--- Blame this lady for Nutty.