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

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (15)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Flu-Bird said:

DEPT OF TWISTED JUSTICE The so called DEPT OF JUSTICE is guilty of dereliction of duity for not prosicuting those BLACK PANTHER PARTY members frankly ERIC HOLDER should resign in disgrace and the whole dept should be utterly cleaned out and those panther terrorists should be tried convicted and given life in prison and OBAMA SHOULD BE IMPEACHED

July 10, 2010

pat said:

... If this isn't reason enough to round those idiots up and put 'em in a lake, I don't know what is. Are they really going to wait until he actually DOES kill somebody to do something about this guy?

July 12, 2010

William said:

Correction, Please: TNA mis-reports AGAIN "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." Wrong: The case was originally downgraded by the Bush-Mukasey Justice Department: http://blog.prospect.org/blog/adam_serwer/2010/07/when_was_the_new_black_panther_content.html See also http://www.usccr.gov/NBPH/05-14-2010_NBPPhearing.pdf This has been in the public record for WEEKS, yet TNA persists in regurgitating GOP soundbites reflexively and uncritically. Again, I have to ask: Is anybody at TNA doing any actual reporting?

July 12, 2010 | url

tony jacobs said:

... Whites and black's have been getting along better the past few year's and now we get these slum bag's looking for a name for themselves and Shabazz is looking to cash in on this problem he is creating. Did you check out those thread's he was wearing on Geraldo's show and all the other slum bag's behind him looked like Salvation Army recipient's. Eric Holder is not going to last long, like Obama doing the thing's they are doing and not doing.

July 12, 2010 | url

Red Pill Please said:

Get Up To Speed William The whole reason this is back on the scene is because of last weeks testimony by J. Christian Adams in front of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. Mr. Adams, who was subpoenaed by the Commission, is an ex-Justice official who quit over the handling of the voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party and accused his former employer of instructing attorneys in the civil rights division to ignore cases that involve black defendants and white victims. This is huge! The article also brings attention to last weeks Russia Today interview, exposing the hypocrisy and damaging propaganda tactics from the totally biased fringe media outlets. regurgitating GOP soundbites????? Get a Clue!

July 12, 2010

William said:

You're missing the point -- -- namely, that it was the Bush administration that initially dismissed criminal charges against the NBPP, electing instead to file a civil suit. This timeline isn't affected by Adams' tardy and dubious "disclosures." Thomas J. Perrelli, identified by Adams as the one who ordered the dismissal of the case against the NBPP, wasn't confirmed until three months after the Bush administration dropped the criminal complaint. Deputy Assitant AG Julie Fernandes, who per Adams' version ordered subordinates not to prosecute minority voter intimidation cases, didn't start at her post until six months after the case was dismissed. Even if she said the despicable things Adams attributes to her, it would have had no bearing on this case. Why wasn't Adams outraged when the Bush-Mukasey Justice Department dropped the criminal probe of the NBPP? Why is he trying to give the Obama-Holder Justice Department all of the blame for this, when, at most, they were simply building on the decisions of their predecessors? Please -- there are cures for minds that have succumbed to Hannitization. Get some professional help.

July 12, 2010 | url

Red Pill Please said:

No Point Missed At All I read your blog link from Adam Serwer who is merely avoiding the whole issue. He also relies heavily on sources from Media Matters, a completely biased left-wing organization funded in large measure by George Soros, MoveOn.org, and the New Democrat Network ... all Obamanoidal Disciples. Your comments are very telling ... It's All Bush's Fault BTW - Sean Hannity is an egotistical neocon who receives no viewership from me.

July 12, 2010

William said:

What's your definition of "all"? My question about Adams' accusations, after studying both sides of this controversy, was this: "Why is he trying to give the Obama-Holder Justice Department all of the blame for this, when, at most, they were simply building on the decisions of their predecessors?" Your rejoinder to me, after filtering that inquiry through whatever partisan filter obstructs clear perception: "Your comments are very telling ... It's All Bush's Fault." Follow, please: How can I be accused of blaming "all" of this controversy on the Bush administration, when I explicitly pointed out that the collectivist Obama regime is merely following through on the decisions of its collectivist predecessor, in this as in so much else?

July 12, 2010 | url

Red Pill Please said:

William, Go back and read the above article, then read your first and subsequent comments posted. Besides the fact that there is no correlation with the subject matter offered, you make it a point to be highly critical of this site as a whole: Again, I have to ask: Is anybody at TNA doing any actual reporting? A "clear perception" of your intended dialogue is obvious to the most casual observer. Case in point, Mr. Clabough's question you fail to address . . . 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? "All" of your posts are designed to lay fault with either the Bush Administration or the Adams testimony while seemingly offering carte blanche to the Black Panther Party and ignoring completely the overwhelmingly incriminating evidence against them, the crux of this article. No "partisan filter" needed here ....

July 13, 2010

William said:

I think you took the wrong pill The NBBP is merely one among scores of racial collectivist groups whose media-amplified bark is immeasurably worse than their bite. Their cadres should be sewn in a sack with corresponding specimens from the National Socialist Movement and hurled into the Potomac. That being said, this must be reiterated: It wasn't the Obama administration that declined to pursue criminal charges of voter intimidation, so whatever its errors or sins might be in this matter, they shouldn't exclusively be given whatever blame is due in this whole mess. On this story, as with so many others, TNA seems content to surf the media waves generated by the GOP agitprop apparat, without seriously considering the possibility that this is a petty partisan dispute dressed up to look like an instance of principled whistle-blowing. The Obama regime is entirely detestable, but the one that preceded it may have been even worse. The Bush "Justice" department was larded with people who either eagerly or tacitly collaborated in a full-scale assault on what remains of our Bill of Rights. So when a veteran of that junta suddenly presents himself as a Noble Voice Of Conscience, I'm just a bit skeptical -- particularly when we're dealing with a matter in which there's just not much substantive difference in the policy decisions at issue.

July 13, 2010 | url

Steven said:

This really is a bunch of crap that is mean to instill fear, nothing more! This is a non-story, but since it is so racially sensitive, it has gotten a lot of attention. And this is how it work... 1. Right-wing bloggers, talk radio hosts, and other conservative media outlets start promoting and distorting the story. 2. Fox News picks up the story and gives it heavy, one-sided coverage. 3. Fox News and conservative media attack the "liberal media" for ignoring the distorted story. 4. Mainstream media outlets eventually cover the story, echoing the right-wing distortions. 5. Fox News receives credit for promoting the story. 6. The story is later proven to be false or wildly misleading, long after damage is done. This pattern is easy to see. And hard to fight.

July 13, 2010

Red Pill Please said:

William? As in "William Norman Grigg?" I should have clicked on your "url" link sooner, but it was your last post with your uniquely talented writing style that jogged my memory. FYI: I used to enjoy reading your articles back when you wrote for TNA.

July 13, 2010

William said:

Thanks, Red Pill Red Pill, you're most generous, especially in light of the fact that we traded a couple of elbows in the foregoing exchange. Thanks for your very kind comments!

July 13, 2010 | url

james said:

... If this would have been the KKK saying kill some black mothers all the baby's and all the black nigers,you got to kill to be free.The Department of justice would have rounded them all up on charges,tried them and thrown the key away.Obama should be impeached and all his czar's, thugs and cronnies thrown out of office all should be tried for treason against the us and it's citizens.

July 14, 2010

Dragongod said:

... New Black Panthers : be advised, I have never been a racist, but neither shall I be a victim. If you come for me with malicious intent, I will resist. I will not fire a 9mm held sideways in one hand at the terminous of a fully extended arm, not striking any target, but looking "cool" in the effort. I will ; however , carefully place the crosshairs at center mass, or between the eyes, depending upon distance, trajectory, and windage. One shot, one kill. Just something to consider before launching any excursions with the purpose of harming me or mine.

July 20, 2010