Anyone who is interested in a hard-hitting interview, can watch Megyn Kelly interview him on her show today. Anyone who wants to see Tommy try to make this guy look better and help steer his answers to make him look like less of a racist loon, can read Tommy’s piece. The choice is yours America!

LOL….Tommy were you scared during the interview? It sounds like you were stuttering and fumbling…LOL.

Once again, absolutely no mention of the facts that the US Civil Rights Commission is investigating this case RIGHT NOW. No, only “

Pardon my premature verbalization. To reiterate:

Once again, absolutely no mention of the facts that the US Civil Rights Commission is investigating this case RIGHT NOW. No, only ”Fox News makes it a huge story.” The fact that there’s a federal investigation underway? Well, you stupid wingnuts wouldn’t even know about it if not for that damned Roger Ailes.

I don’t know what you call this sort of crap, Tommy, but I hope you don’t use the term “journalism”, because it is anything but.

MichelleF said:
Anyone who is interested in a hard-hitting interview, can watch Megyn Kelly interview him on her show today. Anyone who wants to see Tommy try to make this guy look better and help steer his answers to make him look like less of a racist loon, can read Tommy’s piece. The choice is yours America!

Word. Megyn is ten times the interviewer, and as a bonus she’s incredibly smoking hawt.

Pablo said:
Word. Megyn is ten times the interviewer, and as a bonus she’s incredibly smoking hawt.

True. She’s obviously not scared of this racist – can’t say that about everyone that has interviewed him.

Tommy, I hope you are listening to Beck’s show right now, because they are playing your interview and having ALOT of fun with it.

“… what everyone agrees was an isolated incident while the polls were still open

Well, I guess that makes it OK.

I’m normally reserved in my comments, but this article and your so called reporting is a frackin’ disgrace.

MichelleF said:
Tommy, I hope you are listening to Beck’s show right now, because they are playing your interview and having ALOT of fun with it.

LOL….schooled.

Tommy… This guy Shabazz has got you hooked…

Playing out right here folks is a microcosm of how the media is in the shape they are in. In Tommy’s article he writes….”The DOJ says the charges were unsupported by the facts and the law.” Then he goes on to attack FOX.

Tommy, look into who is behind the curtain so to speak on why the DOJ said what they said. Quit being a lap dog unless Shabazz has threatened you…?

We know he scared the living crap out of you by your voice…he had you exactly where he wanted you…he controlled your answers. Tommy if Shabazz was a cop interviewing you for a crime you did not do, he would have gotten you to admitting that you committed the crime! We know Shabazz is not cop…cop killer maybe…but no cop!

As I told you before … take a break from your profession for a while …try to figure out if you really want to continue being a lap dog for these guys….cause…WE AIN’T BUYING IT.

Remember the old saying…”If you want to run with the BIG dogs…you have to quit pissing like a pup!”

-”Well obviously you don’t believe in killing white babies, right?”
-”Umm…not that context, sir”
-Well in what context?
-”No context. For the sake of this interview no context.”

In part 2, thats all you need to know about this man and this organization. Shame on you Tommy for letting him get away with saying and avoiding that.
By the way, whatever happened to that blooper reel?

This pig is an ATTORNEY? From HARV…????

Oh, wait……he graduated from HOWARD! ROFLMAO! He’s not an real ATTORNEY, he’s a product of “traditionally Black colleges”, A/K/A “self-imposed apartheid” where RACIST BLACKS won’t have to COMPETE with anyone who’s not BLACK.

Maybe he should do an ad for the United Negro College Fund?

I guess white guilt, for those that suffer from it, is very powerful. You see, if you view yourself as an individual, and not as some collective, then you don’t have these problems.

-”Well obviously you don’t believe in killing white babies, right?”
-”Umm…not that context, sir”
-Well in what context?
-”No context. For the sake of this interview no context.”

What does that mean? He doesn’t believe in murdering white babies…for the sake of this interview? Does that mean that if he wasn’t being interviewed he would once again believe in murdering babies?

You can spin all you want, but the fact remains: the attorney general’s office told its lawyers not to prosecute black people for these kinds of crimes. But white people are still held accountable. Why hasn’t Eric Holder been fired over this? Why isn’t this a huge story in the mainstream press. Since when does the federal government condone judging criminal cases on the basis of the defendant’s skin color? Can this administration sink any further? Can the media become any more complicit?

felixw said:
You can spin all you want, but the fact remains: the attorney general’s office told its lawyers not to prosecute black people for these kinds of crimes.

They also ordered their employees to ignore lawful subpoenas from the US Civil Rights Commission. BECAUSE OF THE NEW TRANSPARENCY!!!

I don’t understand. Here’s what’s clearly an over the top racist organization advocating violence against white people, and then you have a white guy sucking up to their leader, asking him leading questions in an obvious attempt to give him outs on some of the more outlandish crap.

Here’s a “what if” for you Tommy, would you have conducted your interview in the same way, had the subject been a way over the top black-hating skinhead whose organization advocated killing? If not, you’re a hypocrite and a tool.

“All of this makes the NBPP a perfect bogeyman”

“In fact, leaders of the original Panthers have denounced the NBPP, even suing them for use of the name, and stating that the New Black Panthers operate on “hatred of white people.” The NBPP has been designated a “hate group” by the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the Anti-Defamation League.”

-”Well obviously you don’t believe in killing white babies, right?”
-”Umm…not that context, sir”
-Well in what context?
-”No context. For the sake of this interview no context.”

Sounds like he is the boogeyman.

TC said: “The facts are all in the Obama administration’s favor”, and linked to the “facts” which include:

“I am not convinced that we can establish a basis for an injunction against the Party or Malik Shabazz by showing that the party has violent and racist views against non-blacks and jews.”

Really, Tommy? The *facts* are in their favor?

Gee, perhaps the clip of King Shabazz saying he hates white people, and says white people and their babies have to be killed is relevant as to show their violent and racist views to non-blacks. And I think we clearly see in this interview, his racist views against Jews.

If the Obama administration didn’t want to be seen as appeasing a black hate group, they shouldn’t have dropped the charges against these racist haters who so clearly broke the law.

Coming soon to the Glenn Beck store:

Cracker baby under construction. Get yours now!!

felixw said:
You can spin all you want, but the fact remains: the attorney general’s office told its lawyers not to prosecute black people for these kinds of crimes. But white people are still held accountable. Why hasn’t Eric Holder been fired over this? Why isn’t this a huge story in the mainstream press. Since when does the federal government condone judging criminal cases on the basis of the defendant’s skin color? Can this administration sink any further? Can the media become any more complicit?

Yup, clearly a violation of the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause. But who really cares about that pesky Constitution.

MichelleF said:
Coming soon to the Glenn Beck store:

Cracker baby under construction. Get yours now!!

I want to have a baby just so I can buy it an “I love every iota of my cracker baby” onesie.

Liberty Banned said:
Yup, clearly a violation of the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause. But who really cares about that pesky Constitution.

Given that for decades blacks were persona non grata at the polling stations throughout the south and other places, the irony of this hysterical rhubarb over a “menacing looking black man”, is too much.

Val, so I’m assuming if instead of BP’s in full military garb holding night sticks, it were hooded robert byrd’s hold ropes, you’d be ok with that also?

valkyrie101 said:
Given that for decades blacks were persona non grata at the polling stations throughout the south and other places, the irony of this hysterical rhubarb over a “menacing looking black man”, is too much.

It’s completely irrelevant what racists of the passed did. The US Constitution, via the 14th Amendment, requires that the US government gives equal protection to all citizens. It was wrong when racist southerners did it, and it’s wrong when some racist NBPP member does it. there is not “tit-for-tat.” As individuals, I am not guilty for something someone else did.

valkyrie101 said:
Given that for decades blacks were persona non grata at the polling stations throughout the south and other places, the irony of this hysterical rhubarb over a “menacing looking black man”, is too much.

So, it’s all OK as long as you’re the right color….

MichelleF said:
Val, so I’m assuming if instead of BP’s in full military garb holding night sticks, it were hooded robert byrd’s hold ropes, you’d be ok with that also?

Nope. Wrong color. I think there’s a job waiting for val at the DOJ Voting Rights Section.

LB, I appreciate your effort, but logic is completely lost on libs.

Pablo said:
So, it’s all OK as long as you’re the right color….

The point is that this entire matter is extremely minor compared to the comprehensive intimidation (often physical) suffered by millions of blacks for a very long time, without peep one out of the conservatives.

valkyrie101 said:
The point is that this entire matter is extremely minor compared to the comprehensive intimidation (often physical) suffered by millions of blacks for a very long time, without peep one out of the conservatives.

This one incident does not compare to the wrongs brought onto the black community via the state and federal government. That is true, although no one is saying that this incident is the same as all of those years combined. What we are saying is that it is wrong now, just as it was wrong then. Just as it was wrong for the government to ignore the 14th Amendment then, it is wrong for the government to ignore the 14th Amendment now. If history has shown us anything it has shown us that we should not allow such incidents to go unpunished.

valkyrie101 said:
The point is that this entire matter is extremely minor compared to the comprehensive intimidation (often physical) suffered by millions of blacks for a very long time, without peep one out of the conservatives.

The point is that the law was broken, a case was filed and the defendants defaulted. And then, it was withdrawn by America’s Department of Justice because the subjects were black. As for not one peep out of the Conservatives, I’d suggest you look up the votes on the Civil Rights Act and while you’re at it, figure out who filibustered it. You are, quite simply, wrong.

The New Black Panther Party said yesterday (November 3, 2008) it would send its members out to the polls to ensure its interests on Election Day:

Minister Najee Muhammad, national field marshal for the New Black Panther Party, and Uhuru Shakur, local chairman of the Atlanta chapter of the party, took turns reading statements from Dr. Malik Shabazz, leader of Black Lawyers for Justice and attorney for the party (yes, that Malik Shabazz)…

…”We will not allow some racists and other angry whites, who are upset over an impending Barack Obama presidential victory, to intimidate blacks at the polls,” Muhammad said. “Most certainly, we cannot allow these racist forces to slaughter our babies or commit other acts of violence against the black population, nor our black president.”

Muhammad added, “We must organize to counter and neutralize these threats using all means at our disposal. This is a great time for our people, and we must ensure that peace prevails for our people.”

“We will be at the polls in the cities and counties in many states to ensure that the enemy does not sabotage the black vote, which was won through the blood of the martyrs of our people,” he said.

Sounds like, not only did he not condemn the actions, he supported them back in November.

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/11/04/black-panther-intimidation-at-the-polls/

Surprisingly, the DOJ couldn’t find any proof against Malik Shabazz…?

The actions are wrong, or they’re not. Period.

THERE was a venomous hatefest in the nation’s capitol on Halloween night. It was hosted by Malik Zulu Shabazz of the militant New Black Panther Party. Deadly rhetorical spores of Anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism permeated the air for more than four hours.

Shabazz defended Osama bin Laden, blamed President Bush for the 9-11 attacks, called our founding fathers “snakes” and likened them to terrorists, lambasted Catholicism, Christians, and Jews, and repeated his avaricious call for societal reparations to blacks.

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/michelle/malkin110201.asp

yep…no evidence available at all, that Shabazz hates crackers.

valkyrie101 said:
The point is that this entire matter is extremely minor compared to the comprehensive intimidation (often physical) suffered by millions of blacks for a very long time, without peep one out of the conservatives.

Val…that was done by your beloved Democrats…have your forgotten about Robert Bird…the KKK guy who was only in the KKK so that he could get elected. That from Bill Clinton!

“…not one peep out of the Conservatives” – I never hear Abe Lincoln utter one word…so I guess you are right on that one!

The policies of the Democratic party for the last 50 years has done more to keep Blacks in ghetto’s and impoverished.

It is very funny…a few Sunday’s ago I was listening to two men from the Black community discussing how they could get more and better education for black students in their Community. One said paraphrasing….The education system has ignored our requests for funds for the last 50 years…we need to do a better job of getting money……

50 YEARS…

It must be fun to change history to what you want it to be….

Val, it’s kinda funny watching the idiot left rationalize this. Defending the indefensible is never a place you want to be, it’s really unbecoming, and just begs for people to throw tomatoes at you.

I hit the wrong button…

I thought…if you have not gotten what you need in the last 50 years…how in the hell do you think on the 51st you will.

That is Democratic thinking Val.

Shabazz spreading the lie that doctors injected black men with syphilis and AIDS, and demanding for a separate nation, on Glenn Beck, none the less.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZCDYAy1rJM

“During the 2008 presidential campaign, opponents of then-Senator Barack Obama repeatedly tried to conflate him with the NBPP by virtue of a web page in an open Barack Obama forum, one that was subsequently removed.” ~TC

Oh, and notice how Beck sets the record straight that Obama was not responsible for the NBPP posting on his web site.

sarainitaly said:
Shabazz spreading the lie that doctors injected black men with syphilis and AIDS, and demanding for a separate nation, on Glenn Beck, none the less.

Hey, just like Obama’s mentor, Jerry Wright!

Honestly, this is a win for everyone involved, except for the audience, who are poorly served by this hysteria. For the media, this is perfect summer “Shark Week” fodder. Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally just got a whole lot more interesting, for example.

Top that, Tapper! Who’s the top White House Correspondent now, Jake?

You serve the stupid audience, I’ll take care of serving everyone else…

/TC

All of this makes the NBPP a perfect bogeyman for those who would try to stoke fear of a black President in mainstream Americans

Race-baiter.

“I think it’s a political witch hunt, part of the overall war that the Republicans are waging against Eric Holder in general,” Mr. Shabazz complained. He added that the two exonerated Black Panthers who used racial epithets at the polling place in Philadelphia on Election Day 2008 had acted on their own.

The problem is, this seems to contradict previous statements by Mr. Shabazz and other top party leaders. The Jackson Sun in Tennessee reported that three days before the 2008 election, “Minister Najee Muhammad, national field marshal for the New Black Panther Party, and Uhuru Shakur, local chairman of the Atlanta chapter of the party, took turns reading statements from Dr. Malik Shabazz, leader of Black Lawyers for Justice and attorney for the party.” Mr. Shakur added, “We will be at the polls in the cities and counties in many states to ensure that the enemy does not sabotage the black vote.”

After the election, on Nov. 7, 2008, Mr. Shabazz spoke live on the Fox News Channel to defend his fellow party members. Claiming that they had brought a weapon to the Philadelphia polling place in response to the presence of neo-Nazis, Mr. Shabazz said, “When we found that this was an emergency response [to the supposed Nazis in the parking lot], there was an explanation” for brandishing the weapon.

http://www.indianapolisrecorder.com/articles/2009/12/22/opinion/editorials/doc4b2271b40fb41067893274.txt
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/11/a-black-panther-sings-28726124/

“(I spoke with Shabazz days after the incident, and he denounced the action at the polling place)” ~ TC

I think you were hoodwinked.

Is this guy Gomer Pyle’s buddy, “SHAZZAM, SHAZZAM, SHAZZAM!!”?

Liberty Banned said:
This one incident does not compare to the wrongs brought onto the black community via the state and federal government. That is true, although no one is saying that this incident is the same as all of those years combined. What we are saying is that it is wrong now, just as it was wrong then. Just as it was wrong for the government to ignore the 14th Amendment then, it is wrong for the government to ignore the 14th Amendment now. If history has shown us anything it has shown us that we should not allow such incidents to go unpunished.

Sorry, but it was not the federal government committing those wrongs, it was the local yokels and their state and local governments. The federal government intervened. And what you are really saying is that you hate Obama and any excuse to attack his administration, despite the irony, is not to be passed up.

And what you are really saying is that you hate Obama and any excuse to attack his administration

And you are drunk on the kool-aid and will defend anything he does.

MichelleF said:
And what you are really saying is that you hate Obama and any excuse to attack his administration And you are drunk on the kool-aid and will defend anything he does.

He does? Since when does the President micromanage all the federal government departments? And when the Justice department exercises its discretion, in what amounts to a very small matter, you blame the President? Not rational.

And when the Justice department exercises its discretion, in what amounts to a very small matter, you blame the President?

If you don’t think Obama was part of the decision to drop the case, you’re delusional. Put down the kool-aid.

valkyrie101 said:
And what you are really saying is that you hate Obama and any excuse to attack his administration

I do hate Obama, I’ll tell you that straight up. But think about what you’re saying. If I have an excuse to attack him or his administration, it means that he or his administration gave me that excuse, i.e., someone did something that’s so out of control partisan or racist that it just reinforces the reasons that I think he’s a slimy douche and a racist charlatan.

Figures they’re in a KFC. lmao!

Lanquigirl, oh, boo hoo its all everybody elses fault that makes you hate.

valkyrie101 said:
Since when does the President micromanage all the federal government departments?

Long ago as a county deputy, I had to know, at least in summary, the criminal code here in Washington State. Some of these laws referred to “by action or omission”, for instance, you might be guilty of manslaughter if, by action or omission, you caused the death of another.

Point is, by omission, Obama is allowing the doj to transform into an arm of the hate whitey movement. He has the ability to intervene, but doesn’t. Your argument about micromanaging the department is a red herring.

MichelleF said:
If you don’t think Obama was part of the decision to drop the case, you’re delusional. Put down the kool-aid.

@Michelle / valkyrie, good luck proving that he was or wasn’t. And enough with the Jim Jones, please.

Tommy defends the indefensible — proving that he, as a White House Correspondent, works for the White House, not for the people.

Fox News makes it a huge story. — that sentence, right up front, first paragraph is what this is really about. FNC covered the NEWS, while the rest of the lamestream media spiked it. Fox didn’t make it a huge story Tommy, it IS a huge story, Fox is just the only network that covered it.

What an embarrassment Tommy is to the WHPC.

Lanquigirl, what happened, did the county catch on to you relationship with Stormfront and the white supremists, is that why you are so down on police now.

valkyrie101 said:
He does? Since when does the President micromanage all the federal government departments? And when the Justice department exercises its discretion, in what amounts to a very small matter, you blame the President? Not rational.

The US Civil Rights Commission doesn’t think it’s a very small matter. J Christian Adams, the DOJ prosecutor that quit his job over this dismissal doesn’t think it’s a small matter. Bartle Bull, a long time voting rights activist, civil rights attorney and RFK’s campaign manager doesn’t think it’s a small matter. In fact, he says about what happened at that polling place that: “I think it’s extremely important. I’ve worked in very difficult campaigns in Mississippi. I worked for Charles Ables when he ran for governor as the first black man. I was a civil rights lawyer in Hattiesburg who got arrested there practicing civil rights law. I worked against Strom Thurmond in South Carolina. I have never in my life, and I’ve seen nooses over trees outside polling places where I stopped voting in Mississippi. I have never, ever seen anyone blocking the door to a polling place with a weapon and yelling at people.”

But if val says it’s a small matter, well, val is wrong. Again.

Of course, Bartle Bull was there and val wasn’t, so what does he know?

Wow I don’t know where to begin! This guy needs to be shipped back to the 60s. “No voters complained of intimidation?” As you timidly pointed out, there were plenty of complaints, including the guy who shot the video at the polling place.

“King Samir made an honest error on that day”. If the Klan had been out there holding clubs would he have said they were making an “honest error”? The NBPP gave Shamir a “suspension”. MSNBC fired Imus for doing way less than this, but this lunatic reinstates an obvious racial terrorist. Samir can go back to the voting poll just in time for Obama’s re-election, how convenient!

Why didn’t you ask him how putting thugs in front of polling places was educating black voters? Who hired them to enforce the law? Based on what Shabazz said, it would be acceptable for the Klan to be out in front of the polls in November and in 2012 to “educate” the white voters.

All of his references are to the biggest racists in the country, Sharpton, Jackson, etc. The funniest thing he said was that “we are not a hate group”, but you were afraid to disagree with him, altho, based on your blog post, you are aware that the NBPP has been designated as such by the SPLC and the Anti-Defamation league. Maybe I missed it, but why didn’t you bring that up to him?

You didn’t give the “impression” that this was a “puff piece”, it IS a “puff piece”! This “interview” (snicker, snicker) does “speak for itself”. The parts you ran yesterday were bad enough but these videos are even worse. I am not sure whether you deliberately refused to ask obvious follow up questions to Shabazz’s BS, if you were too frightened to ask, or if you are just incompetent. You even seemed apologetic about asking him some of the so-called “challenging” (snicker, snicker) questions which you turned around to his advantage:

CHRISTOPHER: Um – yeah – na – na – I do want to get to Fox News in a minute. Um – a – I appreciate you sitting down with me. I’ve got a lot of questions because – a – this is something I’ve sort of been thinking about since this happened. Um when we spoke – um – on I believe it was several days after the election – um – you mentioned also other incidents that had occurred – a – around election day – a – instances of – of – of – black voters being intimidated. Ah. . ah . . . unfortunately, because it was sort of cold I never used what you gave me. Do you remember what that stuff was?

SHABAZZ: What was, was threats. . .

CHRISTOPHER: . . . you said to me “this is why – this is why — we had people out at the polls.”

Shabazz went on to bring up the Crocker County, TN “threats” after this exchange. I guess you were giving him the opportunity to justify the actions of the thugs at the Philadelphia polling place because he couldn’t come up with it himself because there was no actual proof of any black voter intimidation on election day.

You were obviously scared crapless because you stuttered and stumbled over almost every word. One thing is for sure, Shabazz was in control of this interview not you. You were intimidated and he took full advantaqe of it. He probably called you a stupid “cracker” when you left.

I am an independent voter who watches all the cable news channels, but to compare this lunatic radical’s modus operandi to conservatives and FNC is quite a stretch. Would you then compare CNN or MSNBC to Al Sharpton? They seem to have the same ideology.

This guy was an “excellent interview subject” if you enjoy being intimidated and lied to. Do you really believe that this was an objective interview? Even your blog post is gushing with respect and compliments towards this lunatic. Shabazz may only be a Howard educated lawyer, but he was clever enough to use you.

Iris, I’ve been meaning to tell you, I just haven’t had time because you’re way down at pretty much the bottom of the list of priorities, but I think it’s sorta cool that you sit by your computer and wait for me to comment on stuff, thanks!

As you so well know lanquigirl, a girls gotta do what a girls gotta do.

What’s the big deal? Um i think it would be a big deal is we had the KKK in full gear standing out in front of polls burning crosses. Surely you would then we this plastered all over the liberal media.
No complaints? Maybe because “crackas” are afraid you might “kill they babies”.
Or maybe you were outside a majority black precinct.
The HYPE your ignorant f*ck is about your “brother” intimidating people into voting for a this snake we now call president DRESSED in your NBPP attire. Seems like an act of the club to me. Two members dressed in attire.
Ughhhh would someone give this guy a tooth pick so he will quit sucking his teeth?? I can’t watch this anymore!!

Imagine If a Conservative Had Said It: Child- and Cop-killer Edition

Remember when media liberals were insisting (falsely, by the way) that RedState’s Erick Erickson had advocated shooting a census taker? Well imagine that a journalist had approached, say, Dick Armey and the following exchange had ensued. Then try to imagine what the media’s response would be.

JOURNO: Obviously you don’t believe in killing census workers.

ARMEY: Umm, not in that context, no sir. No, no.

JOURNO: Okay, in what context?

ARMEY: Just for the sake of this interview, no context. I don’t believe in that. There are too many other government forces out here that are much more powerful that I as a man would focus on. I wouldn’t focus on the census workers, sir, I’d focus on the police.

Replace “census workers” with “babies” and “government” with “white,” and you have the exact statement from Malik Zulu Shabazz, leader of the New Black Panther Party, made in an interview with Mediaite’s Tommy Christopher (video below the fold).

“So,” writes Tabitha Hale at RedState, “just for the sake of this interview, killing white babies is not okay. But those other times, in the proper context? It’s totally okay. You know, as long as the crackers are out of the way.”

Mark Potok, please call your office.

Oh the howling that would ensue if any Tea Party leader, let alone the head of a prominent organization like FreedomWorks, made a statement like that. “Killing census workers is not as productive as killing cops,” is what it would, rightly, be boiled down to.

Shabazz is saying that he considers violence towards police officers to be a more productive activity in battling white people than killing their children. Phew. What a relief.

Where is the media on this?
Where is Chris Matthews to devote an entire hour-long special to the dangers of militant black supremacy groups, as he did with the Tea Party?

Where is Rachel Maddow to devote an hour of her time to warning viewers that violent rhetoric can incite violent action, as she did in the context of the Oklahoma City bombing, naturally blaming it on conservatives?

Where is Joe Klein to remind us of the definition of sedition — “conduct or language inciting rebellion against the authority of the state, in his words — and to accuse these groups of “rubbing right up close” to doing just that?

Where are the host of media personalities who painted the Hutaree militia and a vague threat of “right-wing extremism” as the biggest threat to American peace since 9/11?

They are all silent, because accusing the New Black Panthers of fomenting violence does not fit the narrative — it does not serve their political ends. And this is not some obscure member of the group holding a sign demanding that we “water the tree of liberty” — to use a Tea Party equivalent. This is the leader of a prominent (for a wacky fringe group) organization issuing a thinly-veiled endorsement of violence against police officers.

The lack of condemnation even remotely similar to the hit jobs on the Tea Party movement is quite telling.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/lachlan-markay/2010/07/09/imagine-if-conervative-had-said-it-child-and-cop-killer-edition#ixzz0tCrs8m6F

FK this guy and all the other libs who support this racist.

@MichelleF ~ “Where are the host of media personalities who painted the Hutaree militia and a vague threat of “right-wing extremism” as the biggest threat to American peace since 9/11?”

Anderson Cooper went on and on about the Hutaree showing videos of them running through the woods with guns, and had specials about how dangerous these “white” militia groups are and endless discussions with people like Mark Potok, but not one word about the NBPP or any other black militant group. In fact, he has not said one word about the DOJ whistleblower or the new controversy.

Michelle, it’s not that the MSM doesn’t want to cover the panther story. It’s just that they consider eighty year old white people using walkers as being much more dangerous than young black hoodlums carrying clubs.

writer said:
It’s just that they consider eighty year old white people using walkers as being much more dangerous than young black hoodlums carrying clubs.

Excellent point, writer. The news media were looking everywhere, _anywhere_, for some tea partier to say something racist or hateful, yet ignore this.

Nice to know Libra that Anderson has completely spiked the story; I figured as much. Typical CNN. They claim the middle, but the report the left (lie by omission is still a lie).

CNN lies. MSNBC is pure DNC propaganda and FNC is the ONLY network that gives it’s viewers the truth and fact about both sides of the story.

I just watched Meghan Kelly call for the DOJ to send someone to FNC to discuss the DOJ Whistle Blower, rather than putting out trash from “unnamed sources”.

Is it any wonder people don’t trust Cooper? He like the rest of CNN is nothing but a liar.

I just watched Meghan Kelly call for the DOJ to send someone to FNC to discuss the DOJ Whistle Blower, rather than putting out trash from “unnamed sources”.

Yeah, wasn’t that great. They know she’d eat them alive. The fact that they keep sending her faxes and she bats their arguments out of the park is quite embarrassing.

TfT said:
I just watched Meghan Kelly call for the DOJ to send someone to FNC to discuss the DOJ Whistle Blower, rather than putting out trash from “unnamed sources”.

Yes, after completely trashing, with witness testimony, the unsigned lies being emailed to her by DoJ. Megyn is becoming quite the journalistic rock star.

@TfT, “lie by omission is still a lie”

I agree completely. I have been sending numerous emails and tweets to 360 and to AC’s and Rick Sanchez’s twitter accounts asking why they are not covering this story, but still not one post about the DOJ scandal, the NBPP, or this lunatic Shabazz on the 360 blog. Instead 360 has chosen to post blogs about Lindsay Lohan and Lady Gaga. AC continues his campaign to protect and make excuses for black criminals and black racists. One more thing, the AC360 live blog keeps blocking all comments that mention that Obama is not coming down hard on BP because he needs their help during the next election.

Pablo said:
The US Civil Rights Commission doesn’t think it’s a very small matter. J Christian Adams, the DOJ prosecutor that quit his job over this dismissal doesn’t think it’s a small matter. Bartle Bull, a long time voting rights activist, civil rights attorney and RFK’s campaign manager doesn’t think it’s a small matter. In fact, he says about what happened at that polling place that: “I think it’s extremely important. I’ve worked in very difficult campaigns in Mississippi. I worked for Charles Ables when he ran for governor as the first black man. I was a civil rights lawyer in Hattiesburg who got arrested there practicing civil rights law. I worked against Strom Thurmond in South Carolina. I have never in my life, and I’ve seen nooses over trees outside polling places where I stopped voting in Mississippi. I have never, ever seen anyone blocking the door to a polling place with a weapon and yelling at people.” But if val says it’s a small matter, well, val is wrong. Again.

Yes, well, I am just wondering how the justice department exercising its discretion in law efforcement, as it must do every day, and as it did under Bush when a similar case was likewise not prosecuted, constitutes a basis for attacking Obama?

And If Mr. Bartle Bull, a man with a perfect name, is suggesting that lynchings and voter intimidation (both physical and by local statue) did not effect most of the black population in Mississippi for a very long time, he must be an idiot.

Pablo said:
Megyn is becoming quite the journalistic rock star.

No kidding, she’s hard hitting, doesn’t back down, is _extremely_ intelligent, and as a plus, she’s beautiful. Kelly will rise to the top very quickly.

I’m not ashamed to admit I’ve always had a little girl crush on Megyn. She’s freakin awesome!

valkyrie101 said:
Yes, well, I am just wondering how the justice department exercising its discretion in law efforcement, as it must do every day, and as it did under Bush when a similar case was likewise not prosecuted, constitutes a basis for attacking Obama?

It was the basis for attacking Bush, Ashcroft and Gonzalez. That’s a mighty short memory you’ve got there.

And If Mr. Bartle Bull, a man with a perfect name, is suggesting that lynchings and voter intimidation (both physical and by local statue) did not effect most of the black population in Mississippi for a very long time, he must be an idiot.

If you think that’s what Mr. Bull is saying, or that he’d ever excuse such things, you’re an idiot.

Yes, well, I am just wondering how the justice department exercising its discretion in law efforcement, as it must do every day, and as it did under Bush when a similar case was likewise not prosecuted, constitutes a basis for attacking Obama?

BTW, what similar case was not prosecuted? Names, please.

Megyn is doing a great job! When faced with video evidence, Shabazz is claiming “ignorance” of the complaints of intimidation at the Philadelphia voting poll.

See Tommy, this is what real journalism looks like.

Brilliant! Megyn plays two clips of witness testimony in response to Shabazz saying there was no intimidatin, then asks “Do you dispute that testimony?”

Shabazz: “Ah… uh… that’s the first I’ve heard of that…”

Maybe he should have responded to the suit when it was filed. :)

Right wing conspiracy! Glenn Beck! Booga booga!

King Samir Shabazz is a living example that sometimes stereotypes are real and should be taken seriously.

See Tommy, this is what real journalism looks like.

Yeah TC, you should seriously be embarrased right now.

Now it is Shabazz who looks intimidated!

Ha! Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and Louis Farrakhan, three racist hatemongers!

And who is Farrakhan’s best buddy? Why, it’s Obama’s ‘mentor’, Rev. Wright.

I now have NO -0- DOUBT Obama sent his minions to install talking points to Malik Zulu Shabazz
in EXACTLY WHAT TO SAY TO Megyn Kelly on FOX Interview.

I wonder who* the Obama Minion Messenger was? Hmmmm..Mr. Tommy Christopher >>??

Though Shabazz made a complete donkey of himself, he denied the repugnant accusations,
chirping the same talking points as the Lefty Leaders& talking heads on the topic.
Nice to see such close collaboration

valkyrie101 says:
July 9, 2010 at 2:29 pm

And If Mr. Bartle Bull, a man with a perfect name, is suggesting that lynchings and voter intimidation (both physical and by local statue) did not effect most of the black population in Mississippi for a very long time, he must be an idiot.

Seriously, Val… you can’t make these kind of statements without doing research first. If you don’t know who someone is, don’t just assume you understand.

On Friday’s The O’Reilly Factor on FNC, host Bill O’Reilly interviewed liberal civil rights attorney Bartle Bull about the Justice Department’s recent decision to drop charges against Black Panther members who engaged in voter intimidation in Philadelphia polling place last November. Bull – who worked for both Robert F. Kennedy and Jimmy Carter – was an eyewitness to some of the intimidation, and charged that Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision not to pursue the case was “100 percent politically motivated.”

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2009/06/03/fncs-oreilly-interivews-liberal-attorney-who-witnessed-black-panther-#ixzz0tDFJFaIY

“valkyrie101 says:
July 9, 2010 at 11:58 am valkyrie101(Quote)
2 9
Liberty Banned said:
This one incident does not compare to the wrongs brought onto the black community via the state and federal government. That is true, although no one is saying that this incident is the same as all of those years combined. What we are saying is that it is wrong now, just as it was wrong then. Just as it was wrong for the government to ignore the 14th Amendment then, it is wrong for the government to ignore the 14th Amendment now. If history has shown us anything it has shown us that we should not allow such incidents to go unpunished.

Sorry, but it was not the federal government committing those wrongs, it was the local yokels and their state and local governments. The federal government intervened. And what you are really saying is that you hate Obama and any excuse to attack his administration, despite the irony, is not to be passed up.”

The Federal Government was ignoring the voting issue and enforced its own form of segregation in the Military. This was stopped by President Truman and segregated schools were stopped when President Eisenhower nationalized the Arkansas National Guard and sent it the 101st Airborne Division. But don’t fool yourself, the Federal Government was involved in the atrocities commited against the blacks. If reparations are to be paid I believe they should be paid by the elected city, county, state and federal officials who let these atrocities happen. Not only those individuals but their families. Senator Byrd’s heirs should not profit from his personal mistreatment of any citizen.

While I’m on a rant, I think these people should have due process before their money is taken but they should have to prove their innocence, since they occupied the seats of power. I’d exempt the Kennedy heirs if they personally go out and build the windmill farm of the coast of Cape Cod in front of their compound. By personally build I mean they get into boats and use the tools, not that they hire someone.

Pablo writes:

“As for not one peep out of the Conservatives, I’d suggest you look up the votes on the Civil Rights Act and while you’re at it, figure out who filibustered it. You are, quite simply, wrong.”

Yeah…look it up. WHITE Conservatives filibustered it. Back in those days, White Conservatives belonged to both parties. Are you denying Strom Thurmond was White? Are you claiming that Strom Thurmond was NOT a Conservative? The same Strom Thurmond who PHYSICALLY tried to prevent other Senators from voting for the CRA of 1964? The same Strom Thurmond who ran for President as the Segregationist Party Candidate?

That guy’s your hero, Pablo?

Ronald Reagan, WHITE Conservative..campaigned AGAINST the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Voting Rights Act of 1965, (as did George H.W. Bush) and Fair Housing Act of 1966…right alongside White Conservatives like Barry Goldwater, William Reinquist, and William F. Buckley.

More of your heroes, Pablo?

This is simply a bait and switch. Another Republican driven, Fox News “Let’s-try-and-find-another-way-to-scare-the-hell-out-of-Moderate-Whites-because-the-Reverend Wright-trick-didn’t-work-last-time.”

–Cobra

Cobra said:
WHITE Conservatives filibustered it.

The intellectual contortions required to justify your position is laughable.

Pablo said:
BTW, what similar case was not prosecuted? Names, please.

——————————

Bush DOJ, not Obama, made decision not to pursue criminal charges. Before President Bush left office, the Department of Justice filed a civil complaint asking for an injunction against the New Black Panther Party and some of its members. In his May 14 testimony before the Commission on Civil Rights, Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez explained that the Bush administration’s Justice Department “determined that the facts did not constitute a prosecutable violation of the criminal statutes” but did “file a civil action on January 7th, 2009.” From Perez’s testimony:

“PEREZ: Moving to the matter at hand, the events occurred on November 4th, 2008. The Department became aware of these events on Election Day and decided to conduct further inquiry.

After reviewing the matter, the Civil Rights Division determined that the facts did not constitute a prosecutable violation of the criminal statutes. The Department did, however, file a civil action on January 7th, 2009, seeking injunctive and declaratory relief under 11(b) against four defendants.”

http://mediamatters.org/research/201007070020

Cobra says:
July 9, 2010 at 2:56 pm

Didn’t Robert Byrd also filibuster it? And aren’t those on the left all about celebrating him now?

One of your “heroes” Cobra?

It’s funny to me, how you’ve consistently tried to reframe the debate over this issue… in previous posts making statements that were completely untrue (like they weren’t shouting racists statements). Your willingness to defend an obvious crime, simply because they’re closer to your side political (or part of a “protected” race) is simply un-American. Equal rights for all, does not mean special rights for some.

ImNotBlue said:
It’s funny to me, how you’ve consistently tried to reframe the debate over this issue… in previous posts making statements that were completely untrue (like they weren’t shouting racists statements). Your willingness to defend an obvious crime, simply because they’re closer to your side political (or part of a “protected” race) is simply un-American. Equal rights for all, does not mean special rights for some.

That is curious to many people.
Don’t hold your breath for a response.

langihue writes:

“The intellectual contortions required to justify your position is laughable.”

What position am I justifying? That White Conservatives have a dubious history regarding race in America? LOL.

“Didn’t Robert Byrd also filibuster it? And aren’t those on the left all about celebrating him now?

One of your “heroes” Cobra?”

Nope. Wouldn’t have a Klansman, or former Klansman as my hero. And unless you consider the KKK a “liberal” organization (which some here will try), I don’t see how pointing out that a former Klansman voting against the CRA of 1964 is somehow shocking. Millions upon MILLIONS of White Americans were opposed to non-Whites getting Civil Rights. I’d wager some of the folks who post here are still bitter that it passed, and I already KNOW from previous topics here that there are parts of the CRA of 1964 that many Whites want to REPEAL (private business discrimination)

Pablo said:
“BTW, what similar case was not prosecuted? Names, please.”

Remember the Minutemen, Pablo?

“Bush-era DOJ chose not to prosecute a similar case against Arizona Minutemen

–Cobra

Can white Republiscum make the transfer from KKK to Black Pantherism?? It’s a heady move. We’ll see!

Cobra said:
“The intellectual contortions required to justify your position is laughable.”

What position am I justifying? That White Conservatives have a dubious history regarding race in America? LOL.

So… What you’re saying is that Democrat conservatives outnumbered Republican conservatives by about two to one. LOL right back at ya, cuz.

lanquihue writes:

“So… What you’re saying is that Democrat conservatives outnumbered Republican conservatives by about two to one. LOL right back at ya, cuz.”

And that’s supposed to mean exactly WHAT to me? That I’d somehow ACCEPT Conservative Democrats who are every bit as racist as Conservative Republicans? Where do you get this stuff from?

–Cobra

That game doesn’t work with me, homes, what the hell, do you think I’m Tommy Christopher or something?

And actually, it’s a glaring example of the democrat party, they’ll suck up to any group they think they can get them the most votes, then as well as now. (think Mexico) Back then, racism was still almost the norm, hence, democrats pandered to them, and most opposed the civil rights act. Most Republicans supported the civil rights act on principle.

Languihue,

You need to read up a bit, sir. Southern Republicans were AGAINST the Civil Rights Act. I already pointed out Reagan, Bush Sr. and Goldwater. And the Dixiecrats who were AGAINST the CRA LEFT the Democratic Party and became REPUBLICANS.

It’s not a game. It’s American History.

Next you’ll tell me that Bull Connor was a liberal activist.

–Cobra

…AND THIS GUY & HIS ILK ARE THE OBAMA SUPPORTERS!!!!!

Guess it’s time to hide the ‘cracker-babies’ from the Obama supporters!

Southern, northern, western, I don’t really give a shit, and each time you try to spin off in some justification for why the democrats pandered to racists, I’m more and more convinced that you’re probably a big time racist.

Cobra is a black racist who hates white people. In fact, he’s probably a panther himself. So of course he’s going to side with them and deflect the subject onto other things.

writer said:
Cobra is a black racist who hates white people. In fact, he’s probably a panther himself. So of course he’s going to side with them and deflect the subject onto other things.

Yeah, but what he and other black racists don’t get, is that whitey’s tired of the bullshit. Most people, black and white, would rather just live in a color blind society, but then these black douchebags show up, stir up shit and go out of their way to be different than everyone else, and then bitch about the fact that people treat them different than everyone else. Fuck ‘em.

Tell the Zulu Warrior idiot that 8/28 is not MLK’s birthday. What real black doesn’t know MLK’s birthday. Man this guy is dumb. Did he get that supposed doctorate out of a candy machin? Cobra, Sen Byrd was a democrat and he was an admitted KKK Grand Dragon.

valkyrie101 said:
After reviewing the matter, the Civil Rights Division determined that the facts did not constitute a prosecutable violation of the criminal statutes. The Department did, however, file a civil action on January 7th, 2009, seeking injunctive and declaratory relief under 11(b) against four defendants.”

Right, which they won by default, until the Obama DoJ dropped the charges. Here, let’s have Malik Zulu Shaboo Shabazz explain it to you.

1.They did it.
2. The (Evil Bush) DoJ had them nailed.
3. The Obama DoJ took over and made it all go away (except for the “No bringing weapons to Philly polling places until 2012″ injunction against King Shamil Kaboom Shabazz.)

And then they started ordering people to ignore subpoenas from the US Civil Rights Commission. And then one of their lawyers resigned and started running his big fat cracker mouth about it, and here we are. Do you have a problem with any of this?

Cobra said:
Pablo said:
“BTW, what similar case was not prosecuted? Names, please.”

Remember the Minutemen, Pablo?

“Bush-era DOJ chose not to prosecute a similar case against Arizona Minutemen

I’d love to see what the evidence is in the case that Media Matters claims is equivalent to this one. Where can I find it? This one has tons of evidence, readily available, like this, and it’s easy to find, but if you want I can give you a ton of links. What’s this case Media Matters refers to about? What’s the evidence in it? They, shockingly, don’t provide any.

BTW, if such a thing happened, and it could be proved to have happened, it should have been prosecuted. I have yet to see anything that makes that case, though.

Cobra said:
Yeah…look it up. WHITE Conservatives filibustered it.

Robert Byrd is a conservative? I did not know that. I see that ImNotBlue has corrected your historical ignorance above, but I suggest you take a gander at this and then sit your dumb ass down with a copy of Mr. Smith Goes To Washington. Don’t worry, it’s a movie, not a book.

axel360 said:
-”Well obviously you don’t believe in killing white babies, right?”
-”Umm…not that context, sir”
-Well in what context?
-”No context. For the sake of this interview no context.”

In part 2, thats all you need to know about this man and this organization. Shame on you Tommy for letting him get away with saying and avoiding that.
By the way, whatever happened to that blooper reel?

I don’t understand this notion of “letting him get away with…” what? Saying what he really thinks? That was the purpose of this interview, to reveal Shabazz and the NBPP, and I’d say it was a huge success. What he said after that, when I followed up his “in what context” remark, was truly revealing. He doesn’t want to telegraph what he’s going to do, because that would prevent him from doing it? What?

For the record, I wasn’t afraid, far from it. Malik and I had already spoken at length about the incident, just days after it happened.

We met outside his Russia Today interview, and walked to a nearby Pizzeria, ordered up a couple of slices. He laughed when I asked him if he minded if I ordered pepperoni. He also got the pizzeria owner to turn down the muzak so it wouldn’t interfere with our interview. Not only did he give me no reason to feel threatened, he was very cool and professional. He has obviously done this many times.

If you watch any other interview/White House briefing I’ve conducted, my manner of speech is consistent. This was an extemporaneous interview, I did not work from prepared questions. It’s pretty common for people to hesitate when speaking off the cuff.

I was also pretty exhausted, having slept 2 and a half hours, attended a speech and a briefing at the White House, and walked everywhere I went in 105 degree heat, while chainsmoking. I tend to smoke a lot more when I’m in DC. Anyway, I don’t think I “stammered” all that much, but way to be dicks about it.

As I said in the introduction, I worked to establish a rapport with Malik so he would feel free to speak candidly, which he did, remarkably so. Again, I prefaced some of the tougher questions in order to keep him at ease, and out of a sense of fairness. I especially didn’t want him to storm off and end the interview, like Andrew Breitbart did.

I don’t sandbag my interview subjects. It’s counterproductive. You might get one decent soundbite, and a shot of them storming off, but it’s cheap and shortsighted.

I also don’t understand the criticism that I “led” him on the killing babies question. Maybe because I wasn’t miked, it didn’t come through so well, but I asked that question in astonishment that, out of all the things I’d included in my question, he chose only to address King Samir’s criticism of the black men with white women. When I said, with an incredulous laugh, “Obviously, you don’t believe in killing white babies, do you?” I was referencing many instances from earlier in the interview, when he had espoused working within the law.

Megyn Kelly, on the other hand, didn’t just “lead” him, she practically commanded him how to answer. Fair enough, that’s her style, it’s legit, but it makes this criticism inconsistent.

In case it wasn’t clear enough from my intro, I don’t endorse Malik Shabazz, or the NBPP. My role here was that of interviewer, not commentator. I didn’t add commentary because that would be a herculean task, and I think the interview speaks for itself. I think Malik Zulu Shabazz painted a true portrait of himself and the NBPP. Since I don’t presume to tell you what to think of him, please don’t presume to tell me what I think of him.

I would also point out that I employed the same interview technique with Les Kinsolving, someone else with whom I disagree on a great many things, but who was a fascinating interview subject all the same.

Ok, while you’re here, TGommy, do you agree with the DoJ’s decision to drop the case they’d already won against Both Shabazzes, Jackson and the NBPP?

Tommy Christopher said:
I don’t sandbag my interview subjects. It’s counterproductive. You might get one decent soundbite, and a shot of them storming off, but it’s cheap and shortsighted.

Right.

Need evidence that passions are running high at CPAC this weekend? Then watch the following exchange between Andrew Breitbart and Mediaite columnist Tommy Christopher over ACORN, Dan Savage, mucus, James O’Keefe and a myriad of other subjects that, to be truly appreciated, need to be viewed in the following video. For the record, the thoughts and ideas expressed in this exchange are those of Mediaite columnist White House reporter Tommy Christopher and not those of Mediaite.

They always say that about Steve Krakauer too, huh?

The news of injustice keeps increasing. Black Panthers are not charged with wrongdoing by the U.S. Department of Justice because their crimes are against whites. The bondholders of GM are stripped of their assets without due process by the government. Governmental leaders are bribed in full daylight only to have all investigation of the crimes stifled by the Attorney General. The U.S. borders are overrun with crime and illegal activity and the leaders in D.C. act as if it is important to protect the lawbreakers while the innocent are killed and overrun. When local communities attempt to enforce the law, they are ridiculed and threatened as racists and bigots. They are sued by the very administration entrusted with enforcing the law.
As a man from Cuba said…..When Castro took power, none of us knew he was a Communist.We all thought he was a patriot,just like Barack Obama. “We were all shocked as the government just continued to grab more power. First they said the revolution is over, so please turn in your guns. We all complied.” I remember my uncle saying after it started, ‘Castro will only nationalize some of the big industries, he will never come and take our family hardware store.’ But that is exactly what happened, Castro started with the sugar mills and the large industries, but they eventually came and knocked on the door of our family hardware store.The lesson learned from this discussion is a lesson most Americans refuse to hear. Political leaders can lie about their agenda and once in office they can take totally unexpected turns.
Our beloved America is swiftly becoming a country where only the well connected and politically powerful will be safe.
The only way this problem will be fixed is by massive citizen action. All honest citizens that want to be treated equally must come together and demand that the favoritism, the bribes, the uneven enforcement of law end now. And yes, it can happen here.

lanquihue said:
Yeah, but what he and other black racists don’t get, is that whitey’s tired of the bullshit. Most people, black and white, would rather just live in a color blind society, but then these black douchebags show up,*** **stir up shit and go out of their way to be different than everyone else, and then bitch about the fact that people treat them different than everyone else.**** Fuck ‘em.

Excellent point-s

lanquihue said:
I’m more and more convinced that you’re probably a big time racist.

writer said:
Cobra is a black racist who hates white people.

lanquihue said:
Yeah, but what he and other black racists don’t get,

OH LOOK! The idiot RWers are back calling everyone that doesn’t agree with them racists. Yet they’re the ones that like to cry and whine and say it’s the liberals who are always calling people racists. What a hypocritical pitiful sorry bunch of losers they are.

cracker proud said:
The bondholders of GM are stripped of their assets without due process by the government.

You were joking weren’t you? Because if you weren’t you have no idea what you are talking about.

And the hits keep coming…

I wonder what his name was before he changed it…

People like the NBPs do more to harm race relations than the KKK ever did.

pyrope said:
I wonder what his name was before he changed it… People like the NBPs do more to harm race relations than the KKK ever did.

Fox is doing more to harm race relations than any of the 2 groups you mentioned. The 2 groups you mentioned doesn’t have a national televised station to broadcast their hatred.

the real john t said:
OH LOOK! The idiot RWers are back calling everyone that doesn’t agree with them racists.

No, actually, I’m calling racists racist. Progressivism is a racist philosophy to begin with, since they separate races according to voting blocks. So basically, you’re a racist piece of shit.

Pablo said:
And the hits keep coming…

wow! i hope megyn plays this on her show.

I Just wanna know WTH a King Samir and a Malik Zulu Shabazz Fo Shizzle My Dizzle Are? And where do I Sign UP to be one Too?

Oh Yeah, I Wonder if any of their (MENSA Members) and self-appointed Reps for the Collective Black Race drive American Oppressor made Cars that are in Part, Made by (KILL) WHITEYS!?, And By Blackies?, and By Brownies Too?

Hell, I’ll bet that more than Few of them are runnin’ sets of PHAT 26-inch Wheels on Akron-Made, petroleum-based (Uh-Oh!) Goodyear Tires, made by the very Same Crackas they Be HATING ON!

KEEP IT REAL! MALAKA MALIK!

pyrope said:
I wonder what his name was before he changed it…

Paris Lewis. Sounds kinda fairy, doesn’t it?

the real john t said:
Fox is doing more to harm race relations than any of the 2 groups you mentioned. The 2 groups you mentioned doesn’t have a national televised station to broadcast their hatred.

Don’t forget the racist National Geographic! the real john t’s America, where calling out racists is racist. Why won’t they leave your poor racists alone, john?

Pablo said:
And the hits keep coming…

Tommy if you are still monitoring this…check out Pablo’s find. This is the stuff you should be researching before you interview, make that quiver, stumble, stutter and let Shabazz off the way you did.

Granted you stood in the face of “Evil” but then you only report what he says.

And yes…interviews like the one with Shabazz is NOT running with the BIG Dog’s! Just because you have a seat in the White House briefing room means absolutely NOTHING. Especially when you become a mouth piece for Gibbs and the administration. We can get that anywhere!

Like most far lefties, real john t is only offended by racism when it comes from white people. Rev. Wright, Louis Farrakhan, the black panthers, all get a pass.

Pablo said:
Ok, while you’re here, TGommy, do you agree with the DoJ’s decision to drop the case they’d already won against Both Shabazzes, Jackson and the NBPP?

Well, they didn’t drop charges against King Samir, but the other dismissals were the right call. There was no case against Malik or the NBPP, and since the cops let Jerry Jackson stay at the polls, that would’ve been a tough sale, too.

Pablo said:
Right.

They always say that about Steve Krakauer too, huh?

I didn’t sandbag Breitbart, he knew what I was going to ask him about. We had spoken about the subject before. Here’s some background on that:

http://dailydose.us/2010/04/08/on-newsbusters-michelle-malkin-big-journalism-alan-colmes-and-david-shuster-2/

Still, I’m glad you made the comparison. Like him or not, Shabazz at least had the balls to stay and face tough questions, rather than physically attack me, curse at me, and flee into the crowd.

BatBoy said:

And yes…interviews like the one with Shabazz is NOT running with the BIG Dog’s!

I still don’t understand. What possession of the Big Dog am I supposed to be running with?

So Tommy, your article seems to be saying that picturing the black panthers as a racist organization is nothing but overblown hype and an attempt to link them with Obama. I won’t pretend to know your thoughts, but I doubt that if you interviewed David Duke, and he told you that he doesn’t really practice racism, that you’d head back to your keyboard and write an article saying that Duke has been ‘misunderstood’ and that all the hype about him is overblown. This is what we’ve come to expect from the media. White racism is bad, but when minorities express racism, it must be excused or explained away.

BatBoy said:
Tommy if you are still monitoring this…check out Pablo’s find. This is the stuff you should be researching before you interview, make that quiver, stumble, stutter and let Shabazz off the way you did.

Granted you stood in the face of “Evil” but then you only report what he says.

And yes…interviews like the one with Shabazz is NOT running with the BIG Dog’s! Just because you have a seat in the White House briefing room means absolutely NOTHING. Especially when you become a mouth piece for Gibbs and the administration. We can get that anywhere!

You’re obviously really invested in hating everything I do, but your criticisms just don’t make any sense. You fault me for not asking him about a clip that wasn’t posted until days after my interview? And I guess Megyn Kelly didn’t ask about it because…um…why?

“you only report what he says.”

Really? Did you skip the several thousand words I wrote, over the course of 3 articles? Any factual errors he made, I corrected during the interview, such as his contention that no one was intimidated.

As for this: “Especially when you become a mouth piece for Gibbs and the administration”

This is pure ignorance. I have pressed this administration on a great number of issues, including its dismissive attitude toward the Tea Party.

I’m used to this, I get the same crap from both sides whenever I give someone they hate a fair shake, but that’s my job.

The ‘fair shake’ argument would have been more valid if you hadn’t found it necessary to imply that anyone pointing out the racism of the panthers is only doing it because they ‘fear’ having a black president. In other words, it’s the same old far left position. Anyone who points out black racism must be a racist.

writer said:
So Tommy, your article seems to be saying that picturing the black panthers as a racist organization is nothing but overblown hype and an attempt to link them with Obama. I won’t pretend to know your thoughts, but I doubt that if you interviewed David Duke, and he told you that he doesn’t really practice racism, that you’d head back to your keyboard and write an article saying that Duke has been ‘misunderstood’ and that all the hype about him is overblown. This is what we’ve come to expect from the media. White racism is bad, but when minorities express racism, it must be excused or explained away.

No, I think you’re missing the point. Whatever you think of the NBPP, they are poorly-funded, they have zero influence, their movement is not mainstream in any way. Never do I say they are “misunderstood,” or anything of the kind. Where do I excuse anything any of them said?

What is overblown is the attempt to conflate them with the Obama administration, and to make it seem as though black militancy is about to grip the country, under Obama’s iron, black-gloved fist. This is exactly what Republicans, and PUMAs before them, have tried to do with the NBPP for several years now.

Megyn Kelly’s interview served its purpose, which was to highlight those things that she, and many others, finds “disgusting” about the NBPP.

The purpose of my interview was to allow Shabazz to expose as much truth as I could get him to. I hope you don’t need me to tell you that killing white babies is a disgusting comment, or that not agreeing with it “in that context” is an absurd equivocation. What is less obvious is the view that Shabazz reveals when I ask him about the Plainfield riots, or the way he uses cryptic ambivalence to achieve a menacing effect. As I said in my intro, which you don’t seem to have read very carefully, “Given recent events, including several ominous pronouncements from this very interview, some may ask “Why shouldn’t we be afraid?” It’s a good question. While some conservatives seem invested in conjuring a Black Menace, I would point out that, to a certain degree, they share common cause with the New Black Panther Party. As you’ll see in our interview, Chairman Shabazz seems, at times, to happily play the part of Black Menace, in service to Black Self-Defense. A little fear, and a lot of publicity, serve his interests almost as well as it serves Fox News’.”

writer said:
The ‘fair shake’ argument would have been more valid if you hadn’t found it necessary to imply that anyone pointing out the racism of the panthers is only doing it because they ‘fear’ having a black president. In other words, it’s the same old far left position. Anyone who points out black racism must be a racist.

Not true. Never do I say that ” anyone pointing out the racism of the panthers” is anything. If someone did a straight news profile of the NBPP (who are NOT the “Black Panthers”), out o f the blue, and presented the subject fairly, I’d have no problem with it. That’s not what’s happening here. This story is about conflating the NBPP with the Obama administration and its black Attorney General, and it is part of a pattern of behavior. And it’s not out of fear of a black president, it is to exploit and create fear of a black president.

But isn’t Holder part of the Obama administration? And since Obama’s self-acclaimed ‘mentor’ is Rev. Wright, who is best friends with avowed racist Louis Farrakhan, many of us don’t see questioning Obama’s racial fairness as fear mongering. Given the president’s past and present associations and appointments (Van Jones blaming pollution on whites, for example), it seems naive to dismiss questions of black racism as nothing but hype.

What I read above is Fox should not cover, or FOX somehow created this scandal,
to help Republicans scare people about BPP ties w/White House.. (absurd)
It’s not about Republicans scoring points. You sound like a Democratic Strategist, worrying ONLY
about votes.There has to be a tie w/Obama, a child can see this.

The ties were created by Obamas ERIC HOLDER
Holder created the scandal-NOT FOX
Holder decided to dismiss charges after they had won
Holders people decided to ignore ALL THAT BBP stands for
and not take into account WHAT THEY STAND FOR & ALL THEY’VE SAID IN PAST
& that by dismissing the Voter intimidation case
people would automatically compare & ask questions about the despicable
nature past & present of this New*Black Panther Party.

WHY SHOULDN’T WE ASK QUESTIONS ON TIES BETWEEN OBAMA & BBP?
THEY LED US TO THE OBVIOUS QUESTIONS
WHY ISN’T THE REST OF THE MEDIA ASKING THE SAME?
WHEN U GIVE AN ORGANIZATION A PASS, U INVITE QUESTIONS OF WHY

writer said:
But isn’t Holder part of the Obama administration? And since Obama’s self-acclaimed ‘mentor’ is Rev. Wright, who is best friends with avowed racist Louis Farrakhan, many of us don’t see questioning Obama’s racial fairness as fear mongering. Given the president’s past and present associations and appointments (Van Jones blaming pollution on whites, for example), it seems naive to dismiss questions of black racism as nothing but hype.

You might be able to make that (still wrong) argument if the reporting on the NBPP were true. It is not. There is, in fact, detailed legal documentation to support the 3 dismissed charges. Given that fact, the rest is moot.

And at his first trial, O.J. was found ‘legally’ innocent. Yeah, Tommy. That settles it. Holder being the AG, working under a president with ties to black racists, has nothing to do with anything. Nothing to see here. Move along.

Tommy Christopher said:
Well, they didn’t drop charges against King Samir, but the other dismissals were the right call. There was no case against Malik or the NBPP, and since the cops let Jerry Jackson stay at the polls, that would’ve been a tough sale, too.

No case? Really? The DoJ whistleblower says it’s the easiest case he’s ever seen. This video finds Malik Zulu Shabazz telling us they had them nailed. I’m interested, what parts of what happened here do you think are acceptable if they were to occur again at a polling place? Everything but the nightstick? The racial insults, the orchestrated attempt to intimidate voters and poll watchers? The telling a black man not to show his face? What are you OK with seeing again in November?

What is overblown is the attempt to conflate them with the Obama administration,

Aside from the fact that the Obama administration prevented some well deserved injunctions being issued against them. That sort of conflates itself, hence J Christian Adams’ resignation and subsequent complaints.

Tommy Christopher said:
I didn’t sandbag Breitbart, he knew what I was going to ask him about. We had spoken about the subject before.

Well, that’s one way of looking at it. This is another. Tell you what, you look at that and I’ll go see what they’ve got on Krakauer.

Pablo said:
No case? Really? The DoJ whistleblower says it’s the easiest case he’s ever seen. This video finds Malik Zulu Shabazz telling us they had them nailed. I’m interested, what parts of what happened here do you think are acceptable if they were to occur again at a polling place? Everything but the nightstick? The racial insults, the orchestrated attempt to intimidate voters and poll watchers? The telling a black man not to show his face? What are you OK with seeing again in November?

The question isn’t what I think is acceptable, but what is legal. The government couldn’t make its case against the other 3 defendants, for reasons detailed in the memo I included in the article.

Tommy Christopher said:
The government couldn’t make its case against the other 3 defendants, for reasons detailed in the memo I included in the article.

Says who? They filed the case and won it, because the defendants didn’t bother fighting it. Malik Shabazz admits they were caught. The memo says the facts and law don’t fit, but that’s only after Obama took over. Prior to that, they filed the case, believing that the facts and the law fit just fine. And they won it against all 4 defendants.

On what grounds do you support the statement that they couldn’t make the case? Is it just the memo that said they were against it after they were for it?

Tommy Christopher said:
. Whatever you think of the NBPP, they are poorly-funded, they have zero influence, their movement is not mainstream in any way.

TC?
I want to hear you say the same thing the day you go to vote…..and guys with batons, dressed in weird clothes and berets, step in front of you….block your way….
I suspect you would wet yourself.

Puter Boi said:
TC?
I want to hear you say the same thing the day you go to vote…..and guys with batons, dressed in weird clothes and berets, step in front of you….block your way….
I suspect you would wet yourself.

Hey, some things just aren’t worth worrying about and some things ZOMFG! THEY’RE GONNA KILL US ALL!!!!

Puter Boi said:
TC?
I want to hear you say the same thing the day you go to vote…..and guys with batons, dressed in weird clothes and berets, step in front of you….block your way….
I suspect you would wet yourself.

That’s not what happened here, that is the picture that Fox and the Republicans are trying to paint. There was one guy. One guy who was asked by the police to leave, and he did. This is not an existential threat to democracy.

As for how I would react, I don’t know what’s behind your speculation. I spent over an hour with the baton-wielder’s boss eating pizza. You may be projecting your own fear onto me, but I can assure you, I have none.

And what’s funny is, that baton-wielder’s boss actually hates your guts because you’re white. But being a liberal, you keep your head in the clouds and pretend that other races are incapable of having such feelings.

Tommy Christopher said:
As for how I would react, I don’t know what’s behind your speculation. I spent over an hour with the baton-wielder’s boss eating pizza.

TC?….you can’t possibly be that obtuse…

Oh, when Malik was talking about not killing babies in that context, did anyone wonder “In what context would that work for you?” According to his predecessor at the helm of the NBPP, that would be this context.

Tommy Christopher said:
The question isn’t what I think is acceptable, but what is legal.

Actually, that was exactly the question. With all respect, if I wanted to know what’s legal, I’d go elsewhere for that information.

Tommy Christopher said:
That’s not what happened here, that is the picture that Fox and the Republicans are trying to paint. There was one guy. One guy who was asked by the police to leave, and he did. This is not an existential threat to democracy.

No, there were two guys. And there were other people who sent them to hang out at a polling place. Why?

Then, what good reason is there not to have injunctions that tell all of them that those actions are not to be repeated, ever?

You and the DOJ can quibble about what happened here, but your problem is that you have a protectee with a big mouth. He’s enormously credible, in that context.

Personally, I think if the New Black Panthers spent less time with all those condescending, patronizing, lying liberals ( and if you think I’m talking about you, I probably am), they would be less inclined to be so hateful.

Did anyone else watch Geraldo’s interview with that lunatic Shabazz? I almost fell for Geraldo’s phony outrage right up until the moment he reached out to shake the hand of that piece of trash.

I have to wonder if Geraldo would have done the same thing if Shabazz had been a white supremacist or a skin head? Shabazz doesn’t deserve any more respect than they would. Bad move Geraldo!

Puter Boi said:
TC?….you can’t possibly be that obtuse…

Your assertion that you know how I would react at a polling place is the definition of obtuse. I may be afraid of fish swimming in the air (that’s a whole other thing), but I’m not afraid of King Samir Shabazz, or the New Black Panther Party.

Tommy Christopher said:
I may be afraid of fish swimming in the air

Well who isn’t?

Tommy Christopher said:
Your assertion that you know how I would react at a polling place is the definition of obtuse

Actually it’s not. Being obtuse is answering the assertion from your lofty White House Slouching Perch….instead of trying to identify with an unsuspecting voter arriving at the polls…..and being confronted by members of the NBPP. Your lack of empathy is striking.

Well, I guess Tommy’s not talking to me anymore. *sniff*

Puter Boi said:
Being obtuse is answering the assertion from your lofty White House Slouching Perch….instead of trying to identify with an unsuspecting voter arriving at the polls…..and being confronted by members of the NBPP. Your lack of empathy is striking.

Being obtuse is looking at the entirety of this and shrugging it off with “But the DoJ memo says…”

Just like any other organization in the United States of America the New Black Panther Party has a constitutional right to exist and organize black people in America. The time is ripe for an organization to once again champion the cause of poor and working class African Americans. Black leadeers in America have not done much about may of the ills that affect the black community. Had they continued to struggle for their people African Americans would not have high unemployment, low academic acheivement, atteend the worst schools, live in the worst communites, filled with crime, drugs, alcohol, and the list goes on. Don’t get me wrong I think blacks in America have come a long way. However, they continue to be disproportionately afflicted by all the social ills and poverty. The fact that there is a black president doesn’t mean that blacks have achcieved parity to whites in America. Listen the KKK organizes, the right wing supremacist organize, so what if they organize. As long as they are doing something to improve the economic, and overall social condition of their people and don’t resort to killing anyone, let them be. Now if they break the law or kill someone, well then the rules of engagement shold change. They may actually do some very positive and needed work within the black community. The government has not been able to curb gang violence, narcotraffic, black on black violence, and many more issues that affect the quality of life of blacks. Maybe they are on to something and can actually effect some change. Some of the nations most prominent Black leaders were once considered to be trouble makers and look where they are now. Lets not persecute them as was done to the 60′s Black panther, The Anti-War movement, The Puerto Rican Independence movement, Martin Luther King, Malcom X, Medger Evers, and thousands of others that only wanted to improve conditions, and create opportunity for their people. Are we going to make the same mistakes all over again, out of fear.