Home
Application
Zulu Services
Store

The authors/submitters alone is responsible for
what is expressed

                                         

                                                                                                       

                          

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DID YOU KNOW

FROM THE WEBSITE WWW.MEXICA-MOVEMENT.ORG

THE CONCEPT OF LATINO IS RACIST

 


Remember that there is no such thing as a "Latin" nation, race, or ethnic group---there is only the racist colonial term of "Latin America" ("Latino" just means Latin in Spanish) which refers to the colonialists and the colonial possessions of the Europeans of southern Europe (Spaniards, Portuguese, and French) in the "Western Hemisphere" (our land). The only thing "Latin" about our land is the 500 years of racist colonialism that has killed 95% of our population, and the theft of our land and its wealth.

"Latino" denies us our true Nican Tlaca (Indigenous) identity and heritage. It keeps us slaves to European interests and Spaniard culture.

Collectively, we have no Latin genealogy, Latin blood group, Latin history, or a common Latin culture of food or mythology.

The "Latino" labeling of our people is a colonialist-racist act of Genocide---an attempt to "kill off" our people's true identity, history, independence, and our rights to our land and its wealth. Notice how this is not about "Latino Americans" in the U.S. This is about all of the "Spanish speaker" European Spaniards and their colonies of Nican Tlaca and Africans in the "Americas". What they are in fact doing is separating us from our Anahuac Heritage (Mexican and "Central American" Nican Tlaca identity and history) and enslaving us to their needs.

THE CONCEPT OF HISPANIC is even more racist than "Latino" because it completely denies us our true Nican Tlaca heritage by not even referring to our colonized condition of being in "Latin America". We now become direct possessions of Spaniards. This is an attempt (successful so far) to actively reactivate the Spanish colonial empire through their colonials on our land. The media is their main tool in this parasitic renewed colonialist machine of the European Spaniards.

A side note: A Mixed-blood is not a Criollo or a European.


WE DECLARE INDEPENDANCE FROM

Spaniards, Europeans, And Their Squatter Descendants On Our Land Who Force Their Eurocentric, Racist, & Anti-Indigenous "Hispanic" & "Latino" Labels On Our People!
Eurocentric, Racist, & Anti-Indigenous Cuban-Miami Television & Mexico City Criollos (White People) Who Control Our Knowledge, Identity & Future!
Eurocentric, Racist, & Anti-Indigenous Concepts of "Mestizo" & "Raza" That Enslave Our People To European Interests & Identities!
The Europeans And Their Descendants Who Have Denied Us The Beauty Of Our True Anahuac Heritage And The Ownership Of The Wealth Of Our Land!

Back to Table of Contents

 

20 MAJOR CRIMES OF THE EUROPEANS

 

 

1) THEFT OF OUR LAND was the initial crime of the Europeans. We did not ever give up the ownership of our land, nor did we ever invite Europeans onto our lands.
2) DECEIT AND DISHONOR
by Europeans (along with the violation of our laws) and their unethical and immoral behavior, were what brought about their taking of our land, the genocide of our people, the enslavement of our remaining population, and all of their uncountable crimes against us.
3) RACIST TERRORISM has been the European method that was used to shock us into submitting to their control of our land and our lives.
4) PIRACY (looting, taking what is not yours to take) has been the European profession of choice by which they stole our people's wealth of precious jewels, gold, silver, and other valuables, along with the wealth of our land.
5) VANDALISM has been another signature of European barbaric assaults on our civilization and culture. This defacement was done upon our physical landscape and upon the psychological well-being of our people.
6) KIDNAPPING of our people (as a prelude to extortion and /or enslavement) has been a violation of all nations' sense of decency, law, and civilized behavior.
7) EXTORTION (usually for gold) from our lands has been another favorite crime of the Europeans. They mostly killed their victims, even when ransom was paid.
8) MURDER OF OUR LEADERS was a peculiarly vicious and dishonorable ongoing crime of Europeans. This crime exhibited the total failure of a sense of honor amongst the Europeans. Deceit was usually involved in the murder of our leaders.
9) MASSACRES of unarmed civilian men, women, and children on our lands. This at first happened in the dozens, then hundreds, and eventually it led to routine slaughters in the thousands.
10) GENOCIDE of our people became possible when they discovered that they had built-in biological weapons of mass destruction in their bodies' exposure to smallpox and other diseases---for which we had no immune defenses. They used this biological weapon which was 90 to 98% effective in killing us.
11) TORTURE AND MUTILATION was initially used to get us to surrender all gold objects to Europe. This technique was later used by the church to force conversions and to get confessions out of our people.
12) GRAVE ROBBERY has been an ongoing habit of Europeans from the beginning. This was a way of quickly stealing wealth that was not guarded.
13) ENSLAVEMENT OF OUR PEOPLE to do the work that they were too lazy to do themselves, has been another nasty European habit.
14) DESTRUCTION OF CITIES to take away our pride in our heritage, has been an almost totally successful European crime.
15) BURNING LIBRARY BOOKS in the tens of thousands by Europeans, has been one of the most devastating crimes that can never be mended or reconstructed.
16) UNIVERSITIES & SCHOOLS DESTROYED as a means of enslaving us to ignorance and to serving the interests of Europeans.
17) RACIAL RAPE of our people defiled us as a nation and tainted our people with the filth of their racism that says: More European blood is better.
18) CULTURAL CASTRATION in which laws were decreed that prohibited our people from learning our own culture, our languages, or even the simplicity of having our true names and identity.
19) PROHIBITION OF OUR THEOLOGY which forced the hypocritical version of Christianity on our people.
20) CONTINUATIONS OF THESE CRIMES up to the present day without guilt, reparations, or the "reality thought" that Europeans were in any way evil or monstrous in their actions.

Back to Table of Contents

 

SONG OF VENDIDOS AND COWARDS

 

 

 

THE LYNCHING OF SO CALLED NEGROES. (BLACK PEOPLE)

1885. . . . .184 1895. . . . .171
1886. . . . .138 1896. . . . .131
1887. . . . .122 1897. . . . .166
1888. . . . .142 1898. . . . .127
1889. . . . .176 1899. . . . .107
1890. . . . .127 1900. . . . .115
1891. . . . .192 1901. . . . .135
1892. . . . .235 1902. . . . .96
1893. . . . .200 1903(to Sept. 14,
eight and a half months). . . . .76
1894. . . . .190

Total lynchings. Whites. Negroes. In the South. In the North.
1900. . . . . . . 115 8 107 107 8
1901. . . . . . . 135 26 107 121 14
1902. . . . . . . . 96 9 86 87 9
1903(to Sept. 14). . . . .76 13 63 66 10


Causes Assigned. 1900 1901.* 1902.† 1903.
Murder 39 39 37 32
Rape 18 19 19 8
Attempted rape 13 9 11 5
Race prejudice 10 9 2 3
Assaulting whites 6 - 3 3
Threats to kill 5 - 1 -
Burglary 4 1 - -
Attempt to murder 4 9 4 6
Informing 2 - - -
Robbery 2 “Theft” 12 1 -
Complicity in murder 2 6 3 5
Rape and murder - - - 1
Suspicion of murder 2 3 1 3
Suspicion of robbery 1 - - -
No offence 1 - - -
Arson 2 4 - -
Suspicion of arson 1 - - -
Aiding escape of murderer 1 - 1 -
Insulting a white woman - 1 - -
Cattle and horse stealing - 7 1 -
Quarrel over profit-sharing - 5 - -
Suspicion of rape - 1 - -
Suspicion of rape and murder - 1 - -
Unknown offences 2 6 - 4
Mistaken identity - 1 1 3



NOTE.—The lynchings in the various States and Territories in 1900 were as follows:
Alabama 8 New York 0
Arkansas 6 Nevada 0
California 0 North Carolina 3
Colorado 3 North Dakota 0
Connecticut 0 Ohio 0
Delaware 0 Oregon 0
Florida 9 Pennsylvania 0
Georgia 16 Rhode Island 0
Idaho 0 South Carolina 2
Illinois 0 South Dakota 0
Indiana 3 Tennessee 7
Iowa 0 Texas 4
Kansas 2 Vermont 0
Kentucky 1 Virginia 6
Louisiana 20 West Virginia 2
Maine 0 Wisconsin 0
Maryland 1 Washington 0
Massachusetts 0 ! Wyoming 0
Michigan 0 Arizona 0
Minnesota 0 District of Columbia 0
Mississippi 20 New Mexico 0
Missouri 2 Utah 0
Montana 0 Indian Territory 0
Nebraska 0 Oklahoma 0
New Jersey 0 Alaska 0
New Hampshire 0


* In 1901 one Indian and one Chinaman lynched. † In 1902 one Indian lynched.


From these tables certain facts may be deduced. The first is that, in the year of which an analysis is given (1900), over nine-tenths of the lynchings occurred in the South, where only about one-third of the population of the country were, but where nine- tenths of the negroes were; secondly, that, of these lynchings, about nine-tenths were of negroes and one-third were in the three States where the negroes are most numerous; thirdly, that, while the lynchings appear to be diminishing at the South, the ratio, at least, is increasing at the North.

It further appears that, though lynching began as a punishment for assault on white women, it has extended until less than one-fourth of the instances are for this crime, while over three-fourths of them are for murder, attempts at murder, or some less heinous offence. This may be accounted for, in part, by the fact that the murders in the South partake somewhat of the nature of race-conflicts.

Over 2,700 lynchings in eighteen years are enough to stagger the mind. Either we are relapsing into barbarism, or there is some terrific cause for our reversion to the methods of mediaevalism, and our laws are inefficient to meet it. The only gleam of light is that, of late years, the number appears to have diminished.

To get at the remedy, we must first get at the cause.

Time was when the crime of assault was unknown throughout the South. During the whole period of slavery, it did not exist, nor did it exist to any considerable extent for some years after Emancipation. During the War, the men were away in the army, and the negroes were the loyal guardians of the women and children. On isolated plantations and in lonely ! neighbor hoods, women were as secure as in the streets of Boston or New York.

Then came the period and process of Reconstruction, with its teachings. Among these was the teaching that the negro was the equal of the white, that the white was his enemy, and that he must assert his equality. The growth of the idea was a gradual one in the negro’s mind. This was followed by a number of cases where members of the negro militia ravished white women; in some instances in the presence of their families.*[A]

The result of the hostility between the Southern whites and Government at that time was to throw the former upon their own acts for their defence or revenge, with a consequent training in lawless punishment of acts which should have been punished by law. And here lynching had its evil origin.

It was suggested some time ago, in a thoughtful paper read by Professor Wilcox, that a condition something like this had its rise in France during the religious wars.

The first instance of rape, outside of these attacks by armed negroes, and of consequent lynching, that attracted the attention of the country was a case which occurred in Mississippi, where the teaching of equality and of violence found one of its most fruitful fields. A negro dragged a woman down into the woods, and tying her, kept her bound there a prisoner for several days, when he butchered her. He was caught and was lynched.

With the resumption of local power by the whites came the temporary and partial ending of the crimes of assault and of lynching.

As the old relation, which had survived even the strain of Reconstruction, dwindled with the passing of the old generation from the stage, and the “New Issue” with the new teaching took its place, the crime broke out again with renewed violence. The idea of equality began to percolate more extensively among the negroes. In evidence of it is the fact that since the assaults began again they have been chiefly directed against the plainer order of people, instances of ! attacks on women of the upper class, though not unknown, being of rare occurrence.*[B]

Conditions in the South render the commission of this crime peculiarly easy. The white population is sparse, the forests are extensive, the officers of the law distant and difficult to reach; but, above all, the negro population has appeared inclined to condone the fact of mere assault.

Twenty-five years ago, women went unaccompanied and unafraid throughout the South, as they still go throughout the North. To-day, no white woman, or girl, or female child, goes alone out of sight of the house except on necessity; and no man leaves his wife alone in his house, if he can help it. Cases have occurred of assault and murder in broad day, within sight and sound of the victim’s home. Indeed, an instance occurred not a great while ago in the District of Columbia, within a hundred yards of a fashionable drive, when, about three o’clock of a bright June day, a young girl was attacked within sight and sound of her house, and when she screamed her throat was cut. So near to her home was the spot that her mother and an officer, hearing her cries, reached her before life was extinct.

For a time, the ordinary course of the law was, in the main, relied on to meet the trouble; but it was found that, notwithstanding the inevitable infliction of the death penalty, several evils resulted therefrom. The chief one was that the ravishing of women, instead of diminishing, steadily increased. The criminal, under the ministrations of his preachers, usually professed to have “gotten religion,” and from the shadow of the gallows called on his friends to follow him to glory. So that the punishment lost to these emotional people much of its deterrent force, especially where the real sympathy of the race was mainly with the criminal rather than with his victim. Another evil was the dreadful necessity of calling on the innocent victim, who, if she survived, as she rarely did, was already bowed to the earth by shame, to relate in public! the sto ry of the assault--an ordeal which was worse than death. Yet another was the delay in the execution of the law. With these, however, was one other which, perhaps, did more than all the rest together to wrest the trial and punishment from the Courts and carry them out by mob-violence. This was the unnamable brutality with which the causing crime was, in nearly every case, attended. The death of the victim of the ravisher was generally the least of the attendant horrors. In Texas, in Mississippi, in Georgia, in Kentucky, in Colorado, as later in Delaware, the facts in the case were so unspeakable that they have never been put in print. They could not be put in print. It is these unnamable horrors which have outraged the minds of those who live in regions where they have occurred, and where they may at any time occur again, and, upsetting reason, have swept from their bearings cool men and changed them into madmen, drunk with the lust of revenge.

Not unnaturally, such barbarity as burning at the stake has shocked the sense of the rest of the country, and, indeed, of the world. But it is well for the rest of the country, and for the world, to know that it has also shocked the sense of the South, and, in their calmer moments, even the sense of those men who, in their frenzy, have been guilty of it. Only, a deeper shock than even this is at the bottom of their ferocious rage—the shock which comes from the ravishing and butchery of their women and children.

It is not necessary to be an apologist for barbarity because one states with bluntness the cause. The stern underlying principle of the people who commit these barbarities is one that has its root deep in the basic passions of humanity; the determination to put an end to the ravishing of their women by an inferior race, no matter what the consequence.

For a time, a speedy execution by hanging was the only mode of retribution resorted to by the lynchers; then, when this failed of its purpose, a more savage method was essayed, born of a! savage fury at the failure of the first, and a stern resolve to strike a deeper terror into those whom the other method had failed to awe.

The following may serve as an illustration. Ten or twelve years ago, the writer lectured one afternoon in the early spring in a town in the cotton-belt of Texas--one of the prettiest towns in the Southwest. The lecture was delivered in the Court-house. The writer was introduced by a gentleman who had been a member of the Confederate Cabinet and a Senator of the United States, and the audience was composed of refined and cultured people, representing, perhaps, every State from Maine to Texas.

Two days later, the papers contained the account of the burning at the stake in this town of a negro. He had picked up a little girl of five or six years of age on the street where she was playing in front of her home, and carried her off, telling her that her mother had sent him for her; and when she cried, he had soothed her with candy which, with deliberate prevision, he had bought for the purpose. When she was found, she was unrecognizable. With her little body broken and mangled, he had cut her throat and thrown her into a ditch.

A strong effort was made to save him for the law, but without avail: the people had reverted to the primal law of vengeance. Farmers came from fifty miles to see that vengeance was exacted. They had resolved to strike terror into the breasts of all, so that such a crime could never occur again. This was, perhaps, the second or third instance of burning in the country.

Of late, lynching at the stake has spread beyond the region where it has such reason for existence as may be given by the conditions that prevail in the South. Three frightful instances by burning have occurred recently in Northern States, in communities where some of these conditions were partly wanting. The horror of the main fact of lynching was increased, in two of the cases, by a concerted attack on a large element of the negro population which was wholly i! nnocent. Even the unoffending negroes were driven from their homes, a consequence which has never followed in the South, where it might seem there was more occasion for it.

It thus appears that the original crime, and also the consequent one in its most brutal form, are not confined to the South, and, possibly, are only more frequent there because of the greater number of negroes in that section. The deep racial instincts are not limited by geographical bounds.

These last-mentioned lynchings were so ferocious, and so unwarranted by any such necessity, real or fancied, as may be thought to exist at the South by reason of the frequency of assault and the absence of a strong police force, that they not unnaturally called forth almost universal condemnation. The President felt it proper to write an open letter, commending the action of the Governor of Indiana on the proper and efficient exercise of his authority to uphold the law and restore order in his State. But who has ever thought it necessary to commend the Governors of the Southern States under similar circumstances? The militia of some of the Southern States are almost veterans, so frequently have they been called on to protect wretches whose crimes stank in the nostrils of all decent men. The Governor of Virginia boasted, a few years ago, that no lynching should take place during his incumbency, and he nearly made good his boast; though, to do so, he had to call out at one time or another almost the entire force of the State.

Editorials in some of the Eastern papers note with astonishment recent instances where law-officers in the South have protected their prisoners or eluded a mob. The writers of these editorials know so little of the South that one is scarcely surprised at their ignorance. But men are hanged by law for this crime of assault every few months in some State in the South. A few years ago, Sheriff Smith, of Birmingham, protected a murderer at the cost of many lives; a little later, Mayor Prout, of Roanoke, defended a n! egro rav isher and murderer, and, though the mob finally succeeded in their aim, six men were killed by the guards before the jail was carried. These are only two of the many instances in which brave and faithful officers have, at the risk of their lives, defended their charges against that most terrible of all assailants—a determined mob.*

*The following table is from the Chicago Tribune. The number of legal executions in 1900 was 118, as compared with 131 in 1899, 109 in 1898, 128 in 1897, 122 in 1896, 132 in 1895, 132 in 1894, 126 in 1893, and 107 in 1892. The executions in the several States and Territories were in 1900 as follows:
Alabama 4 New York 3
Arkansas 0 Nevada 0
California 5 North Carolina 9
Colorado 0 North Dakota 1
Connecticut 1 Ohio 1
Delaware 0 Oregon 1
Florida 1 Pennsylvania 15
Georgia 14 Rhode Island 0
Idaho 2 South Carolina 3
Illinois 0 South Dakota 0
Indiana 0 Tennessee 4
Iowa 0 Texas 18
Kansas 0 Vermont 0
Kentucky 0 Virginia 7
Louisiana 6 West Virginia 0
Maine 0 Wisconsin 0
Maryland 3 Wyoming 0
Massachusetts 0 Washington 2
Michigan 0 Arizona 4
Minnesota 0 District of Columbia 3
Mississippi 1 New Mexico 0
Missouri 3 Utah 0
Montana 3 Indian Territory 0
Nebraska 0 Oklahoma 0
New Jersey 4 Alaska 0
New Hampshire 0


There were 80 hanged in the South and 39 in the North, of whom 60 were whites, 58 were blacks, and one a Chinaman. The crimes for which they were executed were: murder, 113; rape, 5; arson, 1. Thus, of the 119 hangings, about two-thirds (80) were in the South and one-third (39) in the North; about one-half (60) of the entire number were of whites, and one-half (58) were of blacks. So, the South appears to have done its part in the matter of punishing by law as well as by violence.


For a time, the assaults by negroes were confined to young women who were caught alone in solitary and secluded places. The company even of a child was sufficient to protect ! them. Th en the ravishers grew bolder, and attacks followed on women when they were in company. And then, not content with this, the ravishers began to attack women in their own homes. Sundry instances of this have occurred within the last few years. As an illustration, may be cited the notorious case of Samuel Hose, who, after making a bet with a negro preacher that he could have access
to a white woman, went into a farmer’s house while the family, father, mother, and child, were at supper; brained the man with his axe; threw the child into a corner with a violence which knocked it senseless, and ravished the wife and mother with unnamable horrors, butchered her and bore away with him the indisputable proof of having won his wager. He was caught and was burnt.


Another instance, only less appalling, occurred two years ago in Lynchburg, Virginia, where the colored janitor of a white female school, who had been brought up and promoted by the Superintendent of Schools, and was regarded as a shining example of what education might accomplish with his race, entered the house of a respectable man one morning, after the husband, who was a foreman in a factory, had gone to his work; and ravished the wife, and then putting his knee on her breast, coolly cut her throat as he might have done a calf’s. There was no attempt at lynching; but the Governor, resolved to preserve the good name of the commonwealth, felt it necessary to order out two regiments of soldiers, in which course he was sustained by the entire sentiment of the State.

These cases were neither worse nor better than many of those which have occurred in the South in the last twenty years, and in that period hundreds of women and a number of children have been ravished and slain.

Now, how is this crime of assault to be stopped? For stopped it must be, and stopped it will be, whatever the cost. One proposition is that separation of the races, complete separation, is the only remedy. The theory appears Utopian. Colonization has been! the dre am of certain philanthropists for a hundred years. And, meantime, the negroes have increased from less than a million to nine millions. They will never be deported; not because we have not the money, for an amount equal to that spent in pensions during three years would pay the expenses of such deportation, and an amount equal to that paid in six years would set them up in a new country. But the negroes have rights; many of them are estimable citizens; and even the body of them, when well regulated, are valuable laborers. It might, therefore, as well be assumed that this plan will never be carried out, unless the occasion becomes so imperative that all other rights give way to the supreme right of necessity.

It is plain, then, that we must deal with the matter in a more practicable manner, accepting conditions as they are, and applying to them legal methods which will be effective. Lynching does not end ravishing, and that is the prime necessity. Most right- thinking men are agreed as to this. Indeed, lynching, through lacking the supreme principle of law, the deliberateness from which is supposed to come the certainty of identification, fails utterly to meet the necessity of the case even as a deterrent. Not only have assaults occurred again and again in the same neighborhood where lynching has followed such crime; but, a few years ago, it was publicly stated that a negro who had just witnessed a lynching for this crime actually committed an assault on his way home. However this may be, lynching as a remedy is a ghastly failure; and its brutalizing effect on the community is incalculable.

The charge that is often made, that the innocent are sometimes lynched, has little foundation. The rage of a mob is not directed against the innocent, but against the guilty; and its fury would not be satisfied with any other sacrifices than the death of the real criminal. Nor does the criminal merit any consideration, however terrible the punishment. The real injury is to the perpetrators of the crime ! of destr oying the law, and to the community in which the law is slain.[C]

It is pretty generally conceded that the “law’s delay” is partly responsible for the “wild justice” of mob vengeance, and this has undoubtedly been the cause of many mobs. But it is far from certain if any change in the methods of administration of law will effect the stopping of lynching; while to remedy this evil we may bring about a greater peril. Trial by jury is the bed-rock of our liberties, and the inherent principle of such trial is its deliberateness. It has been said that the whole purpose of the Constitution of Great Britain is that twelve men may sit in the jury-box. The methods of the law may well be reformed; but any movement should be jealously scanned which touches the chief barrier of all liberty. The first step, then, would appear to be the establishment of a system securing a reasonably prompt trial and speedy execution by law, rather than a wholesome revolution of the existing system.

Many expedients have been suggested; some of the most drastic by Northern men. One of them proposed, not long since, that to meet the mob--spirit, a trial somewhat in the nature of a drum-head court-martial might be established by law, by which the accused may be tried and, if found guilty, executed immediately. Others have proposed as a remedy emasculation by law; while a Justice of the Supreme Court has recently given the weight of his personal opinion in favor of prompt trial and the abolishment of appeals in such cases. Even the terrible suggestion has been made that burning at the stake might be legalized!

These suggestions testify how grave the matter is considered to be by those who make them.

But none of these, unless it be the one relating to emasculation, is more than an expedient. The trouble lies deeper. The crime of lynching is not likely to cease until the crime of ravishing and murdering women and children is less frequent than it has been of late. And this crime, which is will-nigh wholly con! fined to the negro race, will not greatly diminish until the negroes themselves take it in hand and stamp it out.

From recent developments, it may be properly inferred that the absence of this crime during the period of Slavery was due more to the feeling among the negroes themselves than to any repressive measures on the part of the whites. The negro had the same animal instincts in Slavery that he exhibits now; the punishment that follows the crime now is as certain, as terrible, and as swift as it could have been then. So, to what is due the alarming increase of this terrible brutality?

To the writer it appears plain that it is due to two things: first, to racial antagonism and to the talk of social inequality, from which it first sprang, that inflames the ignorant negro, who has grown up unregulated and undisciplined; and, secondly, to the absence of a strong restraining public opinion among the negroes of any class, which alone can extirpate the crime. In the first place, the negro does not generally believe in the virtue of women. It is beyond his experience. He does not generally believe in the existence of actual assault. It is beyond his comprehension. In the next place, his passion, always his controlling force, is now, since the new teaching, for the white woman.*[D]


That there are many negroes who are law-abiding and whose influence is for good, no one who knows the worthy members of the race, those who represent the better element, will deny. But while there are, of course, notable exceptions, they are not often of the “New Issue,” nor even generally among the prominent leaders: those who publish papers and control conventions.

As the crime of rape had its baleful origin in the teaching of equality and the placing of power in the ignorant negroes’ hands, so its perpetration and increase have undoubtedly been due in large part to the same teaching. The intelligent negro may understand what social equality truly means; but to the ignorant and brutal young negro, it ! signifie s but one thing: the opportunity to enjoy, equally with white men, the privilege of cohabiting with white women. This the whites of the South understand; and if it were understood abroad, it would serve to explain some things which have not been understood hitherto. It will explain, in part, the universal and furious hostility of the South to even the least suggestion of social equality.

A close following of the instances of rape and lynching, and the public discussion consequent thereon, has led the writer to the painful realization that even the leaders of the negro race--at least, those who are prominent enough to hold conventions and write papers on the subject--have rarely, by act or word, shown a true appreciation of the enormity of the crime of ravishing and murdering women. Their discussion and denunciation have been almost invariably and exclusively devoted to the crime of lynching. Underlying most of their protests is the suggestion, that the victim of the mob is innocent and a martyr. Now and then, there is a mild generalization on the evil of lawbreaking and the violation of women; but, for one stern word of protest against violating women and cutting their throats, the records of negro meetings will show many against the attack of the mob on the criminal. And, as to any serious and determined effort to take hold of and stamp out the crime that is blackening the entire negro race to- day, and arousing against them the fatal and possibly the undying enmity of the stronger race, there is, with the exception of the utterances of a few score individuals like Booker Washington, who always speaks for the right, Hannibal Thomas and Bishop Turner, hardly a trace of such a thing. A crusade has been preached against lynching, even as far as England; but none has been thought of against the ravishing and tearing to pieces of white women and children.

Happily, there is an element of sound-minded, law-abiding negroes, representative of the old negro, who without parade stand for good order! , and do what they can to repress lawlessness among their people. But for this class and the kindly relations which are preserved between them and the whites, the situation in the South would long since have become unbearable. These, however, are not generally among the leaders, and, unfortunately, their influence is not sufficiently extended to counteract the evil influences which are at work with such fatal results.

One who reads the utterances of negro orators and preachers on the subject of lynching, and who knows the negro race, cannot doubt that, at bottom, their sympathy is generally with the “victim” of the mob, and not with his victim.

Until the negroes shall create among themselves a sound public opinion which, instead of fostering, shall reprobate and sternly repress the crime of assaulting women and children, the crime will never be extirpated, and until this crime is stopped the crime of lynching will never be extirpated. Lynching will never be done away with while the sympathy of the whites is with the lynchers, and no more will ravishing be done away with while the sympathy of the negroes is with the ravisher. When the negroes shall stop applying all their energies to harboring and defending negroes, no matter what their crime so it be against the whites, and shall distinguish between the law-abiding negro and the law-breaker, a long step will have been taken.

Should the negroes sturdily and faithfully set themselves to prevent the crime of rape by members of that race, it could be stamped out. Should the whites set themselves against lynching, lynching would be stopped. The remedy then is plain. Let the negroes take charge of the crime of ravishing and firmly put it away from them, and let the whites take charge of the crime of lynching and put it away from them. It is time that the races should address themselves to the task; for it is with nations as with individual men; whatsoever they sow that shall they also reap.

It is the writer’s belief that the arrest and ! the prom pt handing over to the law of negroes by negroes, for assault on white women, would do more to break up ravishing, and to restore amicable relations between the two races, than all the resolutions of all the Conventions and all the harangues of all the politicians.

It has been tried in various States to put an end to lynching by making the county in which the lynching occurs liable in damages for the crime. It is a good theory; and, if it has not worked well, it is because of the difficulty of executing the provision. Could some plan be devised to array each race against the crime to which it is prone, both rape and lynching might be diminished, if not wholly prevented.

The practical application of such a principle is difficult, but, perhaps, it is not impossible. It is possible that in every community negroes might be appointed officers of the law, to look exclusively after lawbreakers of their own race. The English in the East manage such matters well, under equally complicated and delicate conditions. For example, in the Island of Malta, where the population are of different classes among whom a certain jealousy exists, there are several classes of police: the naval police, the military police, and the civil or municipal police. To each of these is assigned more especially the charge of one of the three classes of whom the population of the Island is composed. Again, in Hong Kong, where the situation is even more delicate, there are several classes of police: the English, the Chinese, and the Indian police. Only the first are empowered to make general arrests; the others have powers relating exclusively to the good order of the races to which they belong, though they may in all cases be called in to assist the English police.

Somewhat in the same way, the negroes might be given within their province powers sufficiently full to enable them to keep order among their people, and they might on the other hand be held to a certain accountability for such good order. It might even be ! required that every person should be listed and steadily kept track of, as is one in Germany at present. The recent vagrant laws of Georgia, where there are more negroes than in the entire North, are an attempt in this direction.

In the same way, the white officials charged with the good order of the county or town might be given enlarged powers of summoning posses, and might be held to a high accountability. For example, ipso facto forfeiture of the official bond and removal from office, with perpetual disability to hold any office again, might be provided as a penalty for permitting any persons to be taken out of their hands.

Few ravishings by negroes would occur if the more influential members of the race were held accountable for the good order of their race in every community; and few lynchings would occur, at least after the prisoners were in the hands of the officers of the law, if those officers, by the mere fact of relinquishing their prisoners should be disqualified from ever holding office again.

These suggestions may be as Utopian as others which have been made; but if they cannot be carried out, it is because the ravishings by negroes and the murders by mobs have their roots so deep in racial instincts that nothing can eradicate them, and in such case the ultimate issue will be a resort to the final test of might, which in the last analysis underlies everything.

 
 

 

 

 

 

WHERE THE NATIVE AMERICANS GOT THE NAME INDIANS

It was stated by Russell Means that he was given documents
from scholars in Turin, Italy (the true home of the Shroud of Turin) that
the Native people of this continent were called "Indians", not because of so
called confusion between this land and India, but because the early
explorers to this continent saw the spiritual nature of the Original Man
living here and wrote back to Italy and Spain and said "these people are
Indios (In-Dios)"  meaning, In God or with God.
Please share this little known fact with the Universal Zulu Nation. Respect
due, Bro. Ernie Panicciolio

 

 

That Phoebe Fraunces a Black women saved George Washington's life on the eve

of the Revolutionary War. The British had a agent Irishman name Thomas Hickey,

who was George Washingtons bodyguard who had an intimate friendship with Fraunces and gave her

a dish of poisoned peas to served Washington when he came for dinner. She became suspicious of the Irishmans

actions and warned Washington, who threw away the peas into the yard, where some chickens ate the peas and fell dead

. For Hickey assassination attempt on Washington's life, he was hanged before a crowed of 20,000 in

New York City. Both Miss Fraunces and her father, Black Sam were officially recognized by the Continental

Congress for their service to the fledging country and given a sum of money. When George became Americas

President, he appointed Fraunces White House steward.

 

That President Ulysses Grant was probably the first and only American President to be arrested, and that it was a Black

District of Columbia policeman by the name of Officer William West who performed the deed in

the 19th century. Officer West book the President for violating the district speeding law and for professionalism as an officer of the law,

the President later on promoted Officer West to a mounted policeman. President Grant not want to be in the public eye as someone who is above the law.

  

HISTORY LINKS

 Noontide Press      Moors  Paper Writing :: Book Reports :: American ...    KKK SITES

Moroccan African Moors     Mulims First to America?      Islam in America 

Muslim Legacy in Early Americas - W. Africans, Moors     tribal Terrorism

 

American History From About    African-Amercian History   The African     African Americans Indians

The African-American Mosaic Exhibition (Library of Congress)     Native Americans  

 The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History    America's West - Development & History

American Indian Genealogy and Media Sites by Phil Konstantin    American Indian History Resources

On This Date in North American Indian History by Phil Konstantin   African Americans - Black Indians

   American President: Presidential History Resources       American President   

 The North Star: A Journal of African-American Religious History   THE SLAUGHTER 

Black Indians (Afro-Native Americans)    American Women's History: A Research Guide

 Documents For The Study Of American History  American Military History   LYNCHINGS

 American History, Page 1, Spanish Conquest of Native America   American History Sites

 Words and Deeds in American History: Selected Documents Celebrating the Manuscript Division's First 100 Years    

       Our Shared History, African American Heritage   African American History: Welcome  

       www.martygrant.com/gen/origins.htm

 


 Hitchhiker's Guide to American History   Popular Songs in American History   VODOUN

 American Cultural History - Decade 1920-1929  Center for History of Physics Home Page

 The Avalon Project : Chronology of American History   Money in North American History

    
  American History Government  African American History - Black History Resources - Academic Info

 Colonial American History Social Studies Resources   Historical Text Archive    BLACK INDIANS

 The Journal of the Moorish Paradigm  First Nations Histories   

 LATIN AMERICA-COLONIAL ECONOMIC HISTORY NEVADA-19TH-CENTURY MINING HISTORY

 Civil War American History 1860 1865 Timeline Battle Map  Maps of Native American Nations, History, Info

 Bibliography II     NATIVE AMERICANS   A History of RACISM  

 

      

1499 Amerigo Vespucci and Alonso de Hojeda sail for South America and reach mouth of Amazon

1502 Vespucci, after second voyage, concludes South America is not part of India and names it Mundus Novus.

1513  Balboa crosses Isthmus of Panama and reaches Pacific for the first time, but believes it to be part of the  Indian Ocean.

1513  Ponce de Leon, searching for the "fountain of youth" reaches and names Florida.

1519  Cortes enters Tenochtitlan (Mexico City); Domenico de Pineda explores Gulf of Mexico from Florida to Vera Cruz.

1522  Andagoya discovers Peru

1523  Jamaica founded.

1531  Pizarro invades Peru, conquers Incas.

1535  Lima founded.

1536  Buenos Aires founded.

1538  Bogota founded.

1539  First printing press in New  World set up in Mexico City.

1540  Grand Canyon discovered.

1541  De soto discovers Mississippi River; Coronado explores from New  Mexico across Texas, Oklahoma, and eastern Kansas.

1549  Jesuit missionaries arrive in South America.

1551  Universities founded in Lima and Mexico City;

1565  ST. Augustine founded (razed by Francis Drake in 1586).

1567  Rio de Janeiro founded.

1605  Santa Fe, New Mexico founded (date in dispute; some say 1609).

A Lesson in Black History
The Statue of Liberty


It is hard to believe that after my many years of schooling (secondary and
post) the following facts about the Statue of Liberty were never taught.

Hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of people including myself have
visited the Statue of Liberty over the years but yet I'm unable to find one
person who knows the true history behind the Statue...amazing!

Yes, amazing that so much important Black history (such as this) is hidden
from us (Black and White). What makes this even worse is the fact that the
current twist on history perpetuates and promotes white supremacy at the
expense of Black Pride!

During my visit to France I saw the original Statue of Liberty. However,
there was a difference...the statue in France is BLACK!!!!!!

"Ya learn something new everyday!"

The Statue of Liberty was originally a Black woman. But, as memory serves,
it was because the model was Black. In a book called "The Journey of The
Songhai People," as Dr. Jim Haskins (a member of the National Education
Advisory Committee of the Liberty-Ellis Island Committee, professor of
English at the University of Florida, and prolific Black author) points out
that is what stimulated the original idea for that 151 foot statue in the
harbor. He says that the idea for the creation of the statue initially was
to acknowledge the part that Black soldiers played in the ending of Black
African Bondage in the United States.

It was created in the mind of the French historian Edourd de Laboulaye,
Chairman of the French Anti-Slavery Society, who, together with sculptor
Frederic Auguste Bartholdi, proposed to the French government that the
people of France present to the people of the United States through the
American Abolitionist Society, the gift of a Statue of Liberty in
recognition of the fact that Black soldiers won the Civil War in the United
States. It was widely known then that it was Black Soldiers who played the
pivotal role in winning the war, and this gift would be a tribute to their
prowess.

Suzanne Nakasian, director of the Statue of Liberty, Ellis Island
Foundations' National Ethnic Campaign said that the Black Americans' direct
connection to Lady Liberty is unknown to the majority of Americans, BLACK
or WHITE.

When the statue was presented to the US. Minister to France in 1884, it is
said that he remonstrated that the dominant view of the broken shackles
would be offensive to the U.S. South because the statue was a reminder of
Blacks winning their freedom. It was a reminder to a beaten South of the
ones who caused their defeat, their despised former captives.

Documents of Proof:

1.) You may go and see the original model of the Statue of Liberty, with
the broken chains at her feet and in her left hand. Go to the Museum of the
City of NY, Fifth Avenue and 103rd Street (212) 534-1672 or call the same
number and dial ext. 208 and speak to Peter Simmons and he can send you
some documentation.

2.) Check with the N. Y. Times magazine, part II May 18, 1986.

3.) The dark original face of the Statue of Liberty can be seen in the N.
Y. Post June 17, 1986, also the Post stated the reason for the broken
chains at her feet.

4.) Finally, you may check with the French Mission or the French Embassy at
the U.N. or in Washington, D.C. and ask for some original French material
on the Statue of Liberty, including the Bartholdi original model. You can
call (202) 944-6060 or 6400.


Please pass this information along! Be sure to send it to people with
children! Open a dialog and discuss it with your friends! Let this be the
beginning of your quest for the Truth about American History past and
present!


 

ORIGINS OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT

 

The contests herein give a historical development of

Police forces in the U.S.

 

19th Century

Organized polices forces as we know them today are a comparatively recent thing in U.S. history. Until the middle of the 19th century, the cities were usually guarded by what was called the “watch system”, meaning a handful of men who patrolled the streets during the night, sometimes calling out the time and the state of the weather. The night watch system was noted for disorganization and inefficiency. Little was expected of it and it wasn’t considered an important service to deserve much money or attention. Watchmen were notorious for falling asleep or being drunk on the job.

1838

            The first major change in this system came when Boston introduced a “DAY” watch, composed of six men, to compliment its night watch.

1844

            New York City created a “Day and Night Police”, the first to combine both day and night watches into a single force. This was the forerunner of the modern city police, and its example was followed by many cities;

                        1851 Chicago

                        1852 Cincinnati and New Orleans

                        1854 Philadelphia and Boston

                        1857 Baltimore and Newark

            By the 1870’s, virtually every major city in the U.S. had created an organized police force along the lines that are still the basis of most police organizations in this country.

What happened during this period that prompted this increase in police power?

            The usual answer given by liberal police historians stresses the increasing population density and ethnic diversity in the cities that came with the beginning of massive immigration from the 1830’s onward. This explanation only scratches the surface and is basically misleading. Although increasing population and ethnic diversity were important features of this period, there is no reason why, in themselves, they should call forth greatly increased use of police force.

            The basic social process going on from the 1830’s to the 1860’s was the beginning of industrial capitalism in the United States, and the emergence of the typical class structure that industrial capitalism creates. Before this time, of course there were poor people in the cities: but capitalist industrialization  dramatically increased their numbers, their visibility, and their militancy, and therefore increased the problems of “social control.”

Regional Police Department: Northeast/Midwest

            Immigration from the American countryside and from overseas (at this time mainly from Ireland and Germany) provided a steady supply of cheap labor for the growing factories of the industrial Northeast and Midwest. Between 1810 and 1870, the number of factory workers in the U.S.; as a whole increased from about 75 thousand to about 2.5 million. This early industrial work force was subject to harsh exploitation in the factories and grim living conditions in the growing  slums of the industrial cities.

            Militant conflict between workers and owners began on a large scale with the first stirrings of a significant American Labor Movement. At the same time, rioting in the cities was common and rates of crime were high. The wealthy and powerful began to define working people and the unemployed poor as the “dangerous classes” and to demand more effective means of controlling and disciplining them. They had an example available over seas since England had undergone the process of capitalist industrialization somewhat earlier, they also were the first to develop modern police forces, and most of the early U.S. police departments took their basic form from the London police , created in 183?

South/Southwest

            The development of the police was somewhat different in the south and southwest. In the south, the early urban police forces were designed mainly to control slave and free blacks in the cities, and in the southwest the early police were developed in connection with the subordination of Mexicans and Native Americans, rather than an immigrant industrial working class.

What is revealed?

Brutality and unpredictability in behavior.

            Although these early police forces were designed as instruments of class domination, they were generally ineffective instruments and were usually regarded as such. There were two main reasons for this;

1.      The early police were sometimes to close to the

Classes and communities they were suppose to

Be controlling

2.      When they were not, they relied almost entirely

On the most primitive method of control, BRUTE FORCE

            Although designed to intimidate and control the “dangerous classes”, the police were usually recruited at least partly from those classes and were therefore unreliable often as enforcers of the interests of property and power. It’s doubtful that the police forces of many cities ever consistently represented the interests of the poor, but they were sometimes sympathetic with them to a significant extent. This became especially clear during some of the labor violence of the 1880’s, when several local police forces refused to intimidate strikers, and military troops had to be called in.

            The development of the National Guard system, which took place between 1877 and 1892, was one result of this unreliability of the local police. Originally officered mainly by business and professional men, and sometimes directly subsidized by wealthy industrialists, the National Guard was specifically designed to be a more direct and therefore more reliable instrument of the wealthy and propertied.

 

 Bell did not invent telephone, US rules

Scot accused of finding fame by stealing Italian's ideas

Rory Carroll in Rome
Monday June 17, 2002
The Guardian

Italy hailed the redress of a historic injustice yesterday after the
US Congress recognised an impoverished Florentine immigrant as the
inventor of the telephone rather than Alexander Graham Bell.
Historians and Italian-Americans won their battle to persuade
Washington to recognise a little-known mechanical genius, Antonio
Meucci, as a father of modern communications, 113 years after his
death.

The vote by the House of Representatives prompted joyous claims in
Meucci's homeland that finally Bell had been outed as a perfidious
Scot who found fortune and fame by stealing another man's work.

Calling the Italian's career extraordinary and tragic, the resolution
said his "teletrofono", demonstrated in New York in 1860, made him
the inventor of the telephone in the place of Bell