Follow-Up to Assassination Remarks

Before I attempt to patch up some of my scattered remarks on Malcolm X's assassination, I'd like to make a couple final comments about the Autobiography. First, with regard to Alex Haley's Epilogue, I believe that reading the Epilogue is important to understand how the Autobiography was actually written and how Haley interacted with Malcolm during the time of their collaboration. Unfortunately, Haley's account of the assassination is not very good or precise. One other thing I did want to bring out was Haley's very good description of the predicament Malcolm X was in in January, '65, roughly a month before his death. Haley says, "He talked about the pressures on him everywhere he turned, and about the frustrations, among them that no one wanted to accept anything related to him except 'my old hate and violence image.' He said 'the so-called moderate' civil rights organizations avoided him as 'too militant' and the 'so-called militants' avoided him as 'too moderate.' 'They won't let me turn the corner!' he once exclaimed, 'I'm caught in a trap.'" (p. 431) And Ossie Davis's brief remarks at the end underscore why he admired him, thoughts that are more eloquently expressed in his Eulogy, which I handed out in class yesterday.

MALCOLM X'S ASSASSINATION: First, let me apologize for my rather scattered remarks yesterday. I realized just before class that I did not have a good synopsis of the assassination and the questions it raises, so I just "winged it," so to speak. Nonetheless, even though it was scattered, the points I made are valid, I believe. So, in this follow-up I am going to reiterate some points, but hopefully present them in a bit more coherent, organized fashion. Also, let me preface this by saying that my references to both the Kennedy and King assassinations probably sounded to you as a bit extreme, like a wild-eyed, so-called "conspiracy buff." Let me assure you that I am not a "buff." I spent many years studying both assassinations (more than 30 years in the case of Kennedy), and most of my studies have focused on the official investigations of those events, not reading the countless books of wild-eyed conspiracy buffs (among whom I would include Oliver Stone). Although the lingering questions about Malcolm X's assassination are not nearly as significant as Kennedy & King, those unanswered questions, unfortunately, have spawned irresponsible conspiracy theories which I believe need to be discredited. And more importantly, we need to demand that our criminal justice system and local and federal investigatory bodies (NYPD, FBI, et. al.) operate more honestly and truthfully with an eye to getting at the truth, not merely being satisfied with politically-acceptable solutions.

* As I mentioned in class, two books stand out in my mind for their objective treatment of the assassination, focusing especially on the trial of the accused assassins. Those are: Malcolm X: The Assassination by Michael Friedly & The Death and Life of Malcolm X by Peter Goldman.

* Friedly does an especially good job documenting the fact that the NOI clearly had the ability and desire to kill Malcolm X, that is, the MEANS & MOTIVE. Malcolm was clearly the greatest threat to that orgainization not only because of his knowledge of Elijah Mohammad's sexual infidelity but also because of corruption among the higher ups in the organization, not to mention dealings with the KKK and the American Nazi Party (the latter is not even mentioned in the Autobiography). Silencing Malcolm X was really essential to the survival of the NOI in many respects.

* The "Fruit of Islam" (FOI) was involved in more than just security and protection. Increasingly, they had taken up the task of disciplining members who strayed from the fold. Friedly notes, "The evolution of the Fruit of Islam was also significant because of the increasing tendency for the FOI to use force against former members of the Nation rather than against the enemies of the movement. Although the original justification of having a paramilitary wing to the Nation of Islam was to serve as the vanguard against Euro-American society, there were no major cases of reported violence between the FOI and whites, although there are countless instances in which the FOI instigated violence against those blacks who supposedly betrayed the movement." (p. 185)

* The trial was a travesty in many respects, and both the defense and prosecution are to blame. First, the police and prosecution decided to charge only 3 individuals, despite the fact that most of the evidence pointed to 5 conspirators. And the prosecution knew from grand jury testimony and from undercover police officer, Gene Roberts, that two of the charged individuals, Butler and Johnson, were not even in the Audobon Ballroom, much less assassins. Apparently, the FBI was also aware of this. But the prosecution went forward anyway, never calling Roberts to testify, for fear of bringing out in the open their surveillance of Malcolm X. The FBI and CIA had ongoing surveillance of Malcolm X, but they too did not want their operations compromised. Friedly also makes clear that whatever Malcolm X was threatening to do, such as charge the U.S. with human rights violations in the UN, was not serious enough for the FBI or CIA to even contemplate killing him. Neither the prosecution or the defense seem interested in trying to get to the bottom of the conspiracy, that is, whether someone higher up in the NOI had ordered Malcolm X's assassination. The defense was no "dream team," such as represented O.J. Simpson. Despite the prosecution's hiding some evdence, they should still have been able to prove Butler and Johnson had nothing to do with it. In short, it seemed that everyone wanted to just get passed this episode with some sort of resolution that would satisfy the public but leave many questions unanswered.

* Goldman makes a good point about Hayer, the one individual who clearly was directly involved: that if Hayer had been hired by the CIA or FBI he would have been happy to pin the blame on the NOI, but he did everything to try to shield them during the trial.

* Goldman also makes a good point that many people, followers of Malcolm X, apparently felt the need to invent a better death for Malcolm -- that is, that he must have been killed by "the man," by elements of the white power structure: the CIA, FBI, et. al.. Being killed by other Blacks only cast the cause of African Americans in a bad light.

* There are some other interesting "loose ends," in this story, some of which will be brought up in the video program we will see next Tuesday.
___________________

PLEASE INCORPORATE THE ABOVE COMMENTS IN YOUR CLASS NOTES. Remember that your next set of journal entries are due next week, and we will hear from: Emily, Sarah, Michaela, and Lauren. Following their presentations, we will see: "Brother Minister: The Assassination of Malcolm X," which runs about an hour and a half. Regarding our next book, Between Cross and Crescent, you can read the Introduction and selections #1 & 2, which takes you up to p. 82, HOWEVER, THERE IS NO HURRY ON THIS SINCE WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO DISCUSS THIS UNTIL AFTER SPRING BREAK.