The New Black Panther Party has been a controversial subject for a number of reasons. On Election Day 2008, Black Panther member King Samir Shabazz and national chairman Malik Zulu Shabazz were caught on video bearing billyclubs outside of a Philadelphia polling center. An investigation was launched and charges of voter intimidation were made, but the Department of Justice, under the leadership of Eric Holder, elected to dismiss the case.
In addition to charges of voter intimidation, King Samir Shabazz, was also caught on video saying: “I hate white people. All of them. Every last iota of a cracker. I hate them.” Standing on South Street in Philadelphia, Shabazz continued, “We didn’t come out here to play today. There’s too much serious business going on in the black community to be out here sliding through South Street with white dirty cracker whores on our arm. And we call ourselves black men.” He then targeted an interracial couple happening by on the street: “What the hell is wrong with you man…with a white girl on your damned arm.”
And he shouted, “You want freedom? You’re going to have to kill some crackers. You going to have to kill some of their babies!”
Given the evidence mounting against members of the New Black Panthers, one wonders what is so controversial about the group. Clear-cut video evidence of voter intimidation as well as provocation of violence against white Americans exists, with very little room for interpretation. Wherein, then, lies the controversy?
Likewise, the New Black Panther Party continues to incriminate itself under interrogation. Tommy Christopher of the liberal Mediaite.com interviewed Malik Zulu Shabazz and asked him to explain the violent remarks made by King Samir against whites. Shabazz’s response focused on King Samir’s reprimanding of the black man with a white woman and ultimately ignored Samir’s calls to kill white babies.
Or perhaps when Shabazz said, “We don’t believe in telegraphing what we may or may not do,” he was addressing Samir’s provocation of murder against white Americans and their offspring. However, when specifically asked if Shabazz believes in killing white babies, he hesitated before responding, “Not in that context”. He added that he would rather focus on the police than innocuous white babies.
Christopher was noticeably disturbed by Shabazz’s unwillingness to outwardly renounce violence against white Americans, but Shabazz defended his assertions by remarking that he supports “self-defense.”
In a very different kind of interview, on July 7, Russia Today did a feature focusing on the New Black Panther Party. However, instead of discussing the evidence of criminal activities produced against the Party, the host addressed the “attack” mounted by Fox News against the New Black Panther Party:
In her introduction, the host asked, “Fox News attacking the Black Panthers?” She went on to state that the voter intimidation charges against the New Black Panthers was “alleged,” despite incriminating video evidence.
“Why is Fox obsessed with the two-year old story?” questioned the host. (Perhaps because justice has yet to be served, and a former Justice Department official is publically accusing the DOJ of playing racial politics. Just a guess.)
Appearing as a guest on Russia Today was Malik Sulu Shabazz, who did not have to defend his Party, but rather discussed Fox News’ motives in targeting his militant group. Shabazz contends that the “so-called voter intimidation charges are simply a tool of the Republican Party.” He added that the allegations are being made because of the upcoming elections, and that the GOP is “at war with Obama and the Justice Department”.
During the discussion, video clips of Glenn Beck, Bill O’ Reilly, Martha McCallem, and Megyn Kelly, all of whom were addressing the crimes committed by members of the New Black Panther Party, subtly played in the background.
Shabazz asserts that the New Black Panthers are being painted as “extremists” and claims that Fox News “does not want the truth to come out because they are serving their own political purpose.”
Strangely enough, the host addressed “intense graphics” produced by the Fox News channel against the Black Panthers, but did not once ask Shabazz to explain or justify the behavior captured on video.
Instead, Shabazz pontificated that Fox News launched the attack on his Party as “part of right-wing paranoia and playing on unfounded racial fears. Fox News should be ashamed of themselves.”
Shabazz accused the Civil Rights Commission of picking and choosing the cases in which they investigate, contending that the same commission takes no interest in civil rights violations against the black community.
When asked what Fox News would gain by inciting racial tensions, Shabazz argued that in stirring up racial fears, Fox News is “stirring up the Tea Parties … the anti-Obama vote … stirring up fears against Black Americans…and the kind of volatile dynamic that they desire in the election season.”
The host added that Fox News is “being called the number one cable news channel in America”, as if it is an ungrounded claim. She then asked who Shabazz believes comprises Fox News’ audience. Unsurprisingly, the answer included whites, Republicans, Confederates, hard Right-Wingers, racist organizations, and some Independents.
Despite Shabazz’s “highly researched” response to the host’s loaded question, a 2008 Pew poll shows that the Fox News audience breaks down as follows: 39 percent Republican, 33 percent Democratic, and 22 percent Independent.
Shabazz closed his interview by reiterating his intentions to engage in a “war” with the Tea Parties, as well as with Glenn Beck. Referring to the August 28th Restoring Honor rally planned by Glenn Beck, Shabazz said, “We’ll see Glenn Beck … at the National monument … since he is attacking us nightly and he won’t talk to us … we’ll see him at the National Mall.” Later Beck reacted to Shabazz’s remarks on the O’Reilly Factor: “Sounds like a threat.”
Thumbnail photo: Malik Shabazz
