A Mother’s Loss

(For the Mothers who lost a child from an unjustified police shooting)

To lose a child under any circumstances is heart-wrenching for any parent. This is especially true when it is done by a representative of government. When the police kill, particularly a child, more specifically a man-child of color, it raises many questions about justification. As the rash of such police killings has created a national debate, it is important to recognize law enforcement in America has evolved into a militarized institution. Like many American institutions, it has been awarded with various forms of immunity, a type of exceptionalism. The contradictory dichotomy between becoming a hero or villain is based on the intent of the police officer who takes a civilian life, and how the law interprets that intent. The problem is that, when a person takes and passes the civil service exam and is sworn in as law enforcement personnel, they are granted the presumption of immunity. Yet the philosophy endemic and common to all law enforcement agencies is that they are guardians of a social order, as defined by law. Impressed upon this philosophy is the evolving of an ideology and a culture that reinforces an ideal, almost a belief system. Such a belief system creates a socio-political environment of a “them” and “us” paradigm, setting them apart and above the civilian population. Here is where the problem begins, which is especially significant when the horrific history of race is added to this evolving institutionalized culture. Just as all police officers are not villains or heroes, the culture of the Blue-line makes it difficult to distinguish them apart, especially when they consistently rally around each other whether right or wrong. Within a known racially biased judicial system, they in essence protect the ideal of their immunity and the sanctity of their institutionalized culture.

It is with this understanding that a Mother must know when they lose a child to a police shooting, it is more than the individual cop they have to confront, it is the culture and institution that they represent. In this regard, while it is not necessary here to offer insight into the well-documented historical relationships between the system of slavery and the development of the police system, I must quote from Steve Martinot, “White Identity, Constitutionality, and its Double Legal System,” where he recounts:

“Both the police and the impunity of slave masters belong to the same paradigm of dual system of law, sanctioned by the law, in producing the subjection of people of color. What contemporary juridical procedure has done, by valorizing police impunity, is to regenerate the double system of law of the slave system … Thus, both manifest the component elements of white racial identity: paranoia … violence …, and white solidarity …”

Hence, the reality of the situation is our community is not confronting individual cops or police agencies, but a historical cultural dynamic that has been institutionalized, not unlike the prison industrial complex and the school to prison pipeline as trinity of repression. It is apparent that these oppressive conditions are not circumstantial, it is policy driven and codified in law. For example, the well-known disparity in sentencing for crack possession compared to cocaine possession, or the number of Black folks stopped and arrested for marijuana possession compared to white folks being stopped and arrested. As a recent Times/CBS poll discovered, 45 percent of Black people, compared to 7 percent of white people, believed they had experienced a specific instance of police discrimination because of their race. Such is the case that 31 percent of white folks recognize police are more likely to use deadly force in Black neighborhoods than in white neighborhoods. If there is to be a remedy to this national problem, it is essential that Mothers of children lost to unjustified police shootings create a national database to identify the extent of the problem. To ensure a national dialogue on this problem demands congressional hearings on how best to De-Centralize and De-Militarize police forces across the country.

In this way, this struggle has the potential to demystify the invincibility of the police culture of impunity and immunity. Obviously, this debate needs to strengthen the argument the police are to represent the interests of people above the profits of the capitalist system. Essentially, Mothers who have lost children to police killings and the community must take a position that law enforcement is not above the law. Secondly, passing a civil service exam does not exempt law enforcement personnel from prosecution for the unjustified killing of innocent civilians. Since the culture of law enforcement supports the impression they are above the law, people must argue that legislation be passed that Community Review Boards have investigative and subpoena power, and are capable of demanding the prosecution and/or firing of police officers who have been found to violate people’s civil and human rights. In this way, the community, especially Mothers of lost children, will be able to take control of the narrative in defining the relationship between the community and law enforcement. This may seem extreme; however, Martin Luther King, Jr. is reported to have instructed: “The question is not whether we will be extremists but what kind of extremists we will be. Will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice, or will we be extremists for the cause of justice?” I believe all will agree there is nothing more extreme than the unjustified killing by police of Black children and men.

I am sorry for all the losses of these children, and Black boys, based on the failure of the Black Panther Party to pass on to the next generation lessons from the Cointelpro onslaught on the BPP. It is extremely unfortunate that such an important institution (police force) embedded in our community maintains a culture that seemingly epitomizes a “them” and “us” dysfunctional relationship. Obviously, community policing, in which police officers live and work in the community, would be best to engender a better relationship with law enforcement. But because of all that has been expressed above, the potential for that to happen is a far-fetched ideal. However, the fight for community policing empowers the community to take control of crime and punishment in the community. We can only hope that by virtue of Mothers’ losses and the struggle to remedy such tragedy, we will win a more improved and appreciated relationship by lessening dependence on the police, and not cultivate negatively perceived belief in the police as an occupying force to keep the natives in control.

I would like to close by making one other observation. There is a need for the inhabitants of our community to take control of the community to lessen the need for police patrols. Street violence and drug dealing that puts everyone’s lives in jeopardy, including cops, is the responsibility of the community. This is a collective failure, despite all of the political and socio-economic policies and decision-making that reinforce impoverishment, joblessness, homelessness and hopelessness … crime in the community is a principle enemy. Collectively, we must confront Black on Black crime to preserve the future of our youth. This means that our youth must be recruited and trained to become community activists in the fight opposing political policies that disenfranchise and impoverish the community. The Black Panther Party for Self-Defense held that criminal activity in the community was reactionary, and potentially counter-revolutionary. We have lost several generations since the Cointelpro destruction of the Black Panther Party to prison and the grave as a result of police repression. We must make every effort as part of challenging the current wave of police killings to eliminate the need for police entrenchment in the community. This requires the community’s responsibility to end Black on Black crime.

This is the hard discussion that must be held as part of the national debate to eliminate these police killings, further eliminating the need for the overwhelming police presence in the community. A Mother’s loss of a child to police or street violence makes this demand on all of us, as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. instructed:

“Every step toward this goal of justice requires sacrifice, suffering and struggle; the tireless exertions and passionate concern of dedicated individuals.

The First Line of Defense IS Power to the People!

Fist Up! Fight Back!

Remember: We Are Our Own Liberators!

Jalil A. Muntaqim
Attica 1/5/15

Anthony Jalil Bottom #77A4283
Attica Correctional Facility
P.O. Box 149
Attica NY 14011-0149

The Empire Hits!

Bill Dunne,Political Prisoner

The U.S. Parole Commission conducted a hearing for a 15 year
reconsideration of my case on 5 November 2014. The last 15 year
continuance (“hit”) was set to expire in December, 2014. The hearing examiner went through the usual things: offender characteristics; the circumstances of my 1979 offenses; a1983 escape attempt; ancient disciplinary infractions.  

I was thinking a good outcome would be a one-year date, a bad one, five years (and, having long experience with the agency of
repression, expecting the worst!).  Then the examiner went unusual.  He unleashed a tirade about anarchist connections and anti-authoritarian views.  He recommended another 15 year hit on the basis thereof.  Four weeks later, I got a Notice of Action (NOA) from the Parole Commission adopting the recommendation and setting my next reconsideration for November of 2029.
The commission made much of the facts that I was on parole and the 1979 conspiracy included three armed bank robberies to finance the escape of a federal prisoner who had killed a customs agent. It also changed the assault of a Seattle police officer during the escape to attempted murder, using this change to raise my offense behavior category and guideline range.  It did so notwithstanding that I was not at the scene of the shooting. the shooter was paroled ten years ago, and having established the old category in 2000 and defended it through seven hearings and appeals. The real reason for the higher offense behavior category is that its guidelines have no upper limit.  I’ve already served more than the top guidelines under, the lower category.
The commission then added a specific amount of time to my parole
guidelines for each disciplinary infraction I’ve had.  That came to
(erroneously, but ad arguendo) 32-132 months.  Next, it singled out five of those infractions from 31, 31, 30, 25, and 19 years ago (attempted escape, knife, handcuff key, “uncompleted” handcuff key, escape paraphernalia -- the second and last bogus) as indicative I was a more serious risk than my parole prognosis showed.  These infractions, the commission alleged without saying why, further justified exceeding the guidelines by so much as the 15 year hit.  It thus used the infractions to both raise and exceed the guidelines contrary to its own rules.
The commission required my codefendant to serve some 198 months on identical charges stemming from the jailbreak conspiracy, and our
offender characteristics are virtually identical. The 132 month maximum the commission’s rescission guidelines say should be added to my parole guidelines thus suggests a sentence in the range of 330 months for me.  The commission and the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) both agreed I had 344 months in at the time of the hearing.  (I actually had 421 months in, but they say the other 77 months went to the state time I got as a result of the same events.)  The commission also ignored the statutory injunction that “old law” prisoners like me should be paroled after 30 years, which would put me out no later than 18 March 2016, even under their erroneous calculation. The commission shifted into political police mode, saying, “the Commission finds your continued association and affiliation with anarchist organizations is evidence you still harbor anti-authoritarian views that are not compatible with the welfare of society or with the conditions of parole.”  

The NOA says zero about what it means by “anarchist,” “association,” “affiliation,” or “anti-authoritarian views” or why they might be problematic for society or parole.  The examiner did mention a
few specifics and waved some printouts, but did not explain what was so wrong with their content.  He said I’d get copies, but so far I have
not. There is no BOP or commission rule forbidding information by or about prisoners being published on the net.
The commission’s hearing examiner mentioned three sites: Prison Radio, LA-ABCF (Los Angeles Anarchist Black Cross Federation), and Denver ABC. None of them advocate violence or criminality.  

They are posted by mostly working class and poor people who want to make their communities and the world better places.  

The examiner denounced “Running Down the Walls,” but did
not say why.  RDTW is a running event sponsored every year by LA-ABCF for more than the last 20 in which people from many communities participate to express their opposition to the overuse of incarceration, especially for political purposes.  The Prisoners’ Committee of the ABCF, of which the examiner also disapproved for no stated reason, advises the ABCF on effective ways to support political prisoners, none of which involve illegality.  Nor is the committee’s advice always solicited or followed. Prison Radio produces broadcasts of news and information about prison
issues from a radical left perspective but advocates no violation of the
law.  All of these web sites post information about particular cases,
prisoners, situations, and events their operators think the bright light
of public scrutiny would help reach a more positive resolution.  They
make their posts based on their own analysis and choices; they are
self-directed and independent.  As for anti-authoritarian, that’s
supposed to be the position of the government itself: “anti” authoritarian regimes such as Putin’s Russia, etc., and pro democracy.  The commission’s decision was the reverse.
The commission also said efforts to contact my codefendant were evidence I am likely to “reengage in similar criminal activity” if released, but does not say how so.  My codefendant was released from prison 10 years ago and from parole five years ago.  I don’t think he’s had so much as a traffic ticket in that time.  One would think the commission would want me to learn from him whatever it was he did to convince them to release him from both prison and parole.  No hearing examiner could tell me, and I asked at many hearings.
The commission apparently feels anything it deems anarchist -- and, by implication, any radical left--political activity or connection warrants
denial of parole. It denied me because it feels I am thus involved.
I’ve already served more time than could be reasonably assessed for my offense behavior and disciplinary record.  My codefendant’s offense role and offender characteristics are virtually identical.  Hence, the time demanded of me should be comparable plus prescribed disciplinary time. That total would be less time than I’ve already served.  Nor is politics any basis for parole denial.  The notion that mere correspondence with anarchists or my codefendant evidences criminal intent is simply frivolous: no print or pictures or audio to felonious intent were ever alleged, and there are no rules against such contact.  Nor has the commission ever objected before to these long-standing connections, and the BOP approved them.  Neither the “anarchist organizations” nor my
codefendant has any criminal history during the relevant times.
The commission’s blatant use of such demonstrably inadequate and
inappropriate reasons to deny my parole is remarkable. I have already filed an administrative appeal and will continue the appeal via habeas corpus against both the BOP and commission.  Not only are the unsupported, conclusory, and irrelevant claims cited for denying me parole a violation of the commission’s own rules, their use constitutes a gross infringement on the First Amendment.  That use violates what remains of my right to hold and express positive, progressive politics as well as that of the people and groups whose speech and association are undermined by such government attacks on political expression via the internet.

I am confident that any comrades who have supported me by putting information by or about me or my politics into the public domain to protect me from the depredations of power, have done so in good faith and not in any way that could legitimately be construed as “not compatible with the welfare of society.”  I’m confident we will not cave to such pressure to self-censor.

Bill Dunne #10916-086
FCI Herlong
Post Office Box 800
Herlong, California  96113

JEICHO IS HONORED TO HAVE AS OUR 

FIRST GUEST WRITER 

FORMER POLITICAL PRISONER 

LYNNE STEWART

 

THE GRAND JURY

One of my most prophetic statements is that the “law” is what “they” want it to be at any given time. Witness the Dred Scott decision, the Japanese internment cases of World War II, and the Scottsboro and other legal lynching cases.

In 2014, stemming from the series (ongoing since 1619) of unprosecuted crimes against the African American population, we confront the lawlessness, now inherent, of an ancient legal institution, the Grand Jury. My history here may be fuzzy (due to my jail time of four-plus years and subsequently battling the big C)—but hey, there’s always Wikipedia! Nonetheless, my own experiences as a practicing criminal defense lawyer for over 30 years will help in this short essay.

In New York State, people accused of serious crimes (felonies) can be brought before the court by a number of avenues. Most common is the presentation of the case, by the District Attorney, in a rudimentary way, to a Grand Jury, who will then vote on an indictment. (The famous or infamous statement that a Grand Jury will indict a ham sandwich being entirely true.)

As I recall, the Grand Jury was an outgrowth of the Magna Carta, a medieval document that was fought for by the nobles (male and white and born to privilege) in which they won the right to not be thrown in and left forever in a dank and dark prison by the king. They now had the right (habeas corpus) to demand to be heard and judged by their “peers” (equals). Of course, we are not talking “fair” here, just the way it operated.

The functioning of the Grand Jury has not changed a great deal since those days. It is still possible for a defense attorney to present her client and allow him to tell his story (usually in a self-defense case), and there are even those rare instances
where the Grand Jury will vote no indictment.

However, the abuse by the Grand Jury in cases such as Michael Brown and Eric Garner, where there is only prosecution testimony, and that is in total control of the District Attorney or prosecuting authorities, is obvious when there can be no presentation of an opposition scenario—they have killed the obvious witnesses. And so, the Grand Jury does what it is best at, following the instructions and demands of the District Attorney, Missouri or Staten Island, N.Y. It is the ham sandwich approach, and there is no blame, no accountability. The police and prosecutors are a single entity, and they have an agenda.

The Grand Jury, in my not so humble view, should be abolished. It is an anachronism, and the miniscule number that benefit from it are not worth the rubber stamp it has become, particularly in the murder of people of color by the police.

A far better solution (short of the revolution we all hope and dream of) is to make those suspected of those heinous crimes stand TRIAL. Let the 12 jurors decide their fate in an open and fully presented evidentiary case. It’s not a perfect solution but far, far better that the endless parade of murderers going free because their victims don’t matter.

Lynne Stewart
— January 3, 2015

WHEN POLICE DIE!

Once again, the nation is compelled to mourn the death .of police officers. Rightly so, if such mourning changes the dynamics of the relationship between a para-militarized police and the communities in which they patrol. By no sense of the imagination should anyone be cavalier about the killing of a police officer, no more than they should be when a police officer wrongly kills a civilian, especially an unarmed civilian. But that is the point. When the valorization of the life of a police officer is raised to the level of hero-worshipping, what does that do to the psyche of the general population in respect to their own lives? Thus, thePBA’s demagoguery (presumably to enhance future contract negotiations) and self-righteous condemnation must be viewed in light of how it ultimately serves to improve police-community relationships(?).

In my previous blog, “Hands Up–Don’t Shoot,” I ended by stating, “…it is time to ensure Black lives matter as much as white lives, and that all people’s lives are as sacred as police lives.” So, that leads to the question, how is that possible when police lives are considered far more valuable than anyone else’s; they are more valued than a sanitation worker’s, a postal worker’s, the bus and taxi driver’s, all of whom serve the community.(?)

Granted, police officers, like firemen, at times put their lives on the line to safeguard the lives of others. It is terrible that in our highly developed technological society, our humanity has yet to reach a point in which the police have not become obsolete. However, I am of the opinion that all of our humanity is challenged by the historical dynamic of racism and. capitalism (exploitation and profiteering). As was learned from OWS, 1% of the popu1ation controls and owns 99% of the country’s wealth. Unfortunately, more often than not, the police are used as tools of the capitalist class to protect financia1 interests over human interests. This is especially disconcerting as it pertains to the racialized disenfranchised and poor, such as racial profiling, In this regard, police violence represents the interests of the State. As I was once told, the police are the first line of defense for the maintenance of state power. If this is true, then it is extremely important the community-at-large recognizes how their lives are only as important as the state permits, for as long as they are exploitable/profitable.

Obviously, the dichotomy between the institution of police and society needs to be investigated and reevaluated, especially, when one is armed (militarized) and the other, for the most part, unarmed and vulnerable. The public perception and discourse imposed by corporate media shapes our collective thinking on the legitimacy of violence; state violence is legitimate, and any violence not sanctioned by the state is illegitimate. We then consciously accept the inevitability of the state, and thus the virtue of its violence.

Hence, community violence in inner cities is not sanctioned by the state, and therefore, it must be policed. Generally, we agree with this policing, when it saves lives and establishes social order. However, there is a causation for inner-city violence that is not readily considered for problem-solving, only managed by policing. Forty years ago, the Black Panther Party sought to challenge the causation of inner-city violence. The BPP attempted to rid the community of drug dealing, gang violence, and police brutality and murder, creating free breakfast programs, free community health clinics, supporting tenants’ rights, etc. In response, the BPP was confronted with the full force of state violence, essentially destroying a movement with the potential of de-criminalizing the community, forging a revolutionary future. Lest we forget, permit me to remind us all, the death of a movement for liberation serves to keep in place the status quo of state violence in all of its forms.

Again, we must loathe all those who fail to recognize the sanctity of life. Therefore, it is extremely necessary to reject corporate media efforts to confuse the valorization of police above and beyond deaths of unarmed civilians killed by police. The noble protest against police violence must not be undermined or in any way disputed; the communities’ grievances are real and must be resolved with justice. We cannot afford to continue to preserve the dichotomy that lends to inferior to superior social paradigm in class and race relationships, and we certainly should not seek to maintain socio-economic disparity that lends to inequitable distribution of wealth.

The De-Militarization and De-Centralization of police is the primary objective that will serve to ensure the safety of the community. The demand for community control of the police strengthens the capacity of the community to police themselves, ridding the community of outside armed and potentially racist forces occupying the community.

In this regard, Martin L. King, Jr. raised the following:

“The question is not whether we will be extremists but what kind of extremists we will be. Will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice, or will we be extremists for the cause of justice?”

The First Line of Defense IS Power to the People!

Fist Up Fight Back!

Remember: We Are Our own Liberators!

Jalil A. Muntaqim

Attica 12/22/14

Anthony J. Bottom #77A4283
Attica C.F.
P.O. Box 149
Attica, NY 14011-0149 

"HANDS UP - DON'T SHOOT"

Hands Up – Don’t Shoot

Contrary to the refrain from the tragic Ferguson, Mo., shooting of Michael Brown, we know that keeping your hands up does not mean you will not be shot. Assata Shakur had her hands up when she was shot on the New Jersey turnpike by a State Trooper, Oscar Grant was laying face down on a subway platform when he was shot in the back by a Bay Area Transit cop, Sean Bell was executed in a hail of bullets by a half dozen N.Y. city cops while sitting in a car, and Trayvon Martin fought to defend himself when he was murdered by a wanna-be cop just yards from his home. Obviously, I find this plea for mercy sorely insufficient, in fact, indefensible when a trained killer has a weapon pointed at you under the guise of Blue authority. Needless to say, this passive posture generally supports the inferior and superior paradigm, creating a social environment in which Black lives do not matter. Brooke Reynolds, in an essay titled “Policing Race,” informed:

“This “order” was created and protected by US law. From slavery to today’s militarized ghettos, it is clear that racial violence has almost always occurred explicitly or implicitly in cooperation with the law. William and Murphy trace the relationship between the law and social order: “The fact that the legal order not only countenanced but sustained slavery, segregation, and discrimination for most of our nation’s history and the fact that the police were bound to uphold that order sets patterns for police behavior and attitudes toward minority communities that has persisted until the present day.” (Parenti). In terms of the relationship to the police themselves, “Government-sponsored racial discrimination and segregation have deeply affected the organizing ethos and practices of US policing.” (Parenti)—thus, it becomes clear that “... relationship between police violence and social institution of policing is structural, rather than incidental or contigent.” (Martinot, Sexton). Wielding an arsenal of moralist rhetoric and trained over hundreds of years of historical practice, the police work in conjunction with white society and its government to keep white lawlessness understood as nothing other than “public order,” enforcing “the law of white supremacist attack” with determination and fervor.”

In response this reality, Robert Williams wrote the book “Negroes With Guns,” reflecting on the institutionalization of State violence and the inherent human rights of Black people to defend themselves, that was also practiced by the Deacons for Defense opposing Klu Klux Klan violence.

Reynolds continues:

“By confronting the perpetration of police racial violence with the maintenance of social order, it is rendered unidentifiable, ignorable, and inarticulable. Having been so deeply written into our very conception of social organization and policing, police brutality and racism becomes invisible to white society (who also has an investment in denying the reality of racial violence). Shocked by stories of police violence and unmoved by the dehumanization of racial profiling, white people simultaneously reveal their ignorance of and investment in the violent inherent in the protection of white supremacy.”

Furthermore, Reynolds states:

“The ignorability and inarticulability of racist police violence to white society is directly related to its historical and current impunity. Authorized by the government end white society as a whole, the police are given the freedoms necessary in order to guarantee the stability of white supremacy and to continue constructing racialized identities. Within this system, injustices done to people of color are not classified as injustices, if they are recognized at all. Police murders, abuses, and terrorization of people of color, no matter how gratuitous, are more often than not met with legal indifference, public support, and are virtually bereft of consequences. Martinot notes the relationship between modern-day police impunity, slave patrols, and white supremacist law:

“Both the police and the impunity of slave masters belong to the same paradigm of dual systems of law, sanctioned by the law, in producing the subjection of people of color. What contemporary juridical procedure has done, by valorizing police impunity, is regenerated the doubled system of law of the slave system… Thus, both manifest the component elements of white racialized identity paranoia…, violence…, and white solidarity…” (Martinot).

“The racist police violence which pervades the landscape of US society today is not incidental, nor [is it] the work of ‘rogue cops,’ [It is] an essential part of the larger campaign of social re-racialization” (Martinot). Historically rooted in a very real desire to subjugate and control people of color in America, and operating in a way which inscribes and deepens whiteness as an identity and a value, today’s police forces operate along the same paradigm as their predecessors.” (Reynolds)

These lengthy quotes from Reynolds “Policing Race” establish the lens in which we are to view the recent rash of police killings of unarmed Black people. It is extremely important that conversations and national debate about the relationship between the police and the Black community is not the same as the relationship between the police and the white community. The historical ramifications of this dynamic relationship today are subject to the reality of the racist culture in law enforcement. Law enforcement modus operandi, for all intents and purposes, are based on outside armed forces, albeit white people, patrolling communities of color, with all of its inherent racial implications.

Over forty years ago, the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense raised the e very same issues, establishing their patrols to ensure police officers conducted their business in accord with the law. For their actions and concerns for the welfare of the Black community, the BPP became the number one target for extermination by law enforcement across the country. The primary reason is because the BPP did not believe or practice passive resistance, they were not in the streets chanting “Hands Up Don’t Shoot.” Such passive pleas would be considered a misguided belief protesters would be safe challenging a system of armed forces with innate disdain for the well being of Black people’s lives. Rather, such modus operandi parallels the racial attitudes of the slave patrols out of which the police system evolved. (See, Hadden, Sally E., Slave Patrols, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001) (Reynolds, pg. 3-8).

The task of young people today is to increase pressure and define the national debate on the relationship between the Black community and police. De-Militarization and De-Centralization must become the primary demand. The call for community control of the police was what the BPP fought to achieve, and that objective is what needs to be demanded now. The police need to live in the community, not come from outside the community. There must be more diversity in the command and structure of the police, reflecting the composition of the community they patrol.

It is time to reverse the chant ‘No Justice No Peace’ to “No Peace Without Justice,” it is time to ensure Black lives matter as much as white lives, and that all people’s lives are as sacred as police lives.

The First Line of Defense IS power to the People!

Remember: We Are Our Own Liberators f

Jalil A. Muntaqim #77A4283 (aka Anthony Bottom)

Attica Correctional Facility, P.O. Box 149, Attica NY 14011-0149

Attica - 12/5/14

JERICHO MOVEMENT POSITION STATEMENT ON POLICE BRUTALITY IN AMERICA IN CONTEXT WITH THE ONGOING STRUGGLE FOR JUSTICE

JERICHO MOVEMENT POSITION STATEMENT ON

POLICE BRUTALITY IN AMERICA IN

CONTEXT WITH THE ONGOING STRUGGLE FOR JUSTICE

By: Jihad Abdulmumit

National Jericho Movement

December 2014

(Michael Brown, Eric Garner, the United Nations Convention Against Torture

 and the Call to Free All Political Prisoners from the Movements of the 60s and 70s) 

In the wake of the decision not to indict white police officers, Darren Wilson and Daniel Pantaleo, the people are once again left with egg on their faces in their hopes for justice; while at the same time lacking comprehensive black leadership, and suffering from continued disrespect and assaults at the hands of state/police violence. Jericho shares in the disappointment, but not the surprise. Such actions, or non-actions, on the part of the state are historic and systemic. Black people all too frequently still do not have any rights that the white man is bound to respect (Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857)).

There is a direct link between the murders of Michael Brown, Eric Garner, et al., ¹ the recent UN Convention Against Torture international treaty review in Geneva, Switzerland, ² and the call for the freedom of all political prisoners from the movements of the 60s and 70s.³   Ferguson and Staten Island epitomize the political, economic and social plight of Black people in the United States. It showcases white racism, poverty in communities of color, police violence, disempowerment, marginalization and lack of representation in all relevant spheres of community life.

During the week of November 11, 2014, non-government organizations and people from the United States travelled to Geneva, Switzerland to participate in the 53^rd UN Session of the Committee against Torture. Here the U.S. government heard from its citizens and from the UN Commission to address whether the U.S. has been in compliance with its signed international treaty agreement against torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. Needless to say, it has not. The U.S. has always been guilty of varying extremes of torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of its citizens and people from other countries abound. The U.S. denied most; and either overlooked or gave minimum lip service to the rest of the cited violations. 

In spite of the U.S. government’s non-compliance, presenting the condition of Black people in the international arena follows the legacies of El Hajj Malik El Shabazz, Paul Robeson, W.E.B. DuBois, and hundreds of revolutionary organizations of the past.  White racism and the practice thereof is a human rights violation; and the human rights of Black people are constantly being violated with every instance of police brutality, murder, profiling, denial of equal representation and resources, and disproportionate prison sentences. Although the journey is long and arduous, African Americans must be present and represented on the international stage.

Historically, from the slave plantation till now, there has always been struggle waged by Black people for freedom, self-determination and empowerment. This struggle for freedom, justice, dignity, human rights, and a better quality of life has always been met with resistance, violence, persecution, and death at the hands of the powers that be. The peoples’ sojourn has witnessed brutal responses from the state and federal government, and from those marking their progress and success in society off of the blood, sweat, and tears of the common people.

Slaves on the slave plantation in their flight/fight to be free were constantly victimized, oppressed and exploited under the violence of the salve-master’s whip, noose, hound dogs, patty-rollers, black codes, court rulings, 3/5ths of a person, Dred Scott, racial religious doctrines, segregation, racism, discrimination, water hoses, electric cattle prods, cross burnings, city-burnings, hooded creatures, shirt and tie creatures, gerrymandering, grandfather clauses, local government, congressmen and senators, presidents, federal and state laws, anti-unions, anti-workers, corporations, no-knock, stop ‘n frisk, the prison industrial complex, the FBI, Counter Intelligence Programs (COINTELPRO), communication management units, control units, special housing units, war on drugs, war on terrorism, Patriots Acts, Homeland Security, Rendition, entrapment, frame-ups and set-ups, mass media, propaganda, political incarcerations, Republican hearings on mosques and Muslims across the country, police brutality, and extra-judicial laws, policies and practices denying the human right to be free, safe and productive. The history is consistent.

Oppression breeds Resistance! Slaves risked their lives fighting back and running away. Abolitionists sacrificed their lives on the underground railroads. Men and women determined to be free led revolts. People taught, preached, marched, boycotted, picketed, and rioted.

In contemporary times these struggles comprised more than just the civil rights struggles. Just as relevant were the nationalists, socialists and Islamic movements of the 60s and 70s. Organizations like the Black Panther Party, Black Liberation Army, Nation of Islam, Republic of New Africa, Dar-ul-Islam, Weather Underground, Young Lords, American Indian Movement, and more strove gallantly to combat racial violence, police brutality and carve out and build a new self-determined life for Black, Brown and Red people, which in turn would uproot the oppression and decay of racism in America from the lives of all people.

People who fought against these conditions were targeted by police forces, and, in particular, the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Counter Intelligence Program (COINTELPRO). Freedom fighters were sought, killed, and imprisoned. A number of these political prisoners remain till today; now serving over 40 years in prison, and oftentimes in solitary confinement for extraordinary long periods of time and denied adequate medical care and attention.

It is imperative that people and organizations fighting against police brutality, racism and corruption, and who are involved with advocating human rights, community development, and educating and organizing around social/political issues, and addressing various aspects of the prison industrial complex (viz. mass incarcerations, special housing units, solitary confinement, etc.) learn who these freedom fighters are, and understand their legacy and how things were done; what lessons should be learned; and above all, to render them full support. If those remaining captives who stood up and sacrificed, organized, and fought against racism, exploitation, and repression of people of color and poor communities across the U.S. are not supported, the door remains wide open for present and future soldiers/activists/revolutionaries/educators to be politically persecuted and incarcerated with impunity and with the expectation of no support from anyone. The State and status quo have the green light to continue repressing, exploiting and committing injustices unabated.

A movement – past or present – that does not support those who sacrificed their lives, families and physical freedom for the freedom of us all, is not a movement at all.

From Michael Brown and Eric Garner to the international arena, to supporting our incarcerated freedom fighters, to right back to the streets of Ferguson and Staten Island, it’s all interconnected. Connecting the historical dots, grasping tight to the legacy of the freedom struggle, and embracing our strength of a nation of people are prerequisites to building a new and free society. 

Join the Wave!

Stand up and be free!

Free all Political Prisoners!

www.thejerichomovement.com

jihadabdulmumit@gmail.com

https://twitter.com/Jericho4PPs