Sunday, March 30, 2008

Statement From Maureen Faulkner On Latest Legal Development


"Today, after 26 years of waiting, my family and I can finally say that Mumia Abu-Jamal is officially a 'murderer.' No longer can Abu-Jamal's life may be spared due to a legal technicality- the wording on a standardized jury form- all of his arguments about judicial bias, prosecutorial misconduct, and police malfeasance have been rejected as lies and nonsense by the second-highest and most impartial court in the land. In the end they have ruled that Abu-Jamal is a common killer who is guilty of murdering my husband. While we still hope to one day see Mumia Abu-Jamal executed for the heinous and cowardly crime he committed, we are heartened by the decision made today by the Third Circuit Court, bringing my family and me one giant step closer to this painful journey. There will undoubtedly be more appeals and more ridiculous claims made by Abu-Jamal and his band of attorneys, but we are committed to staying the course until we are finally afforded the closure promised to us by a jury 26 years ago."

Maureen Faulkner-along with co-author Michael Smerconish- recently penned the New York Times best-selling book, Murdered by Mumia: A Life Sentence Of Loss, Pain, and Injustices (The Lyons Press), as a vehicle to definitively present the facts of the case along with her personal side of the story.

Mumia Sentencing Hearing Would Be Complicated


By Emilie Lounsberry
Inquirer Staff Writer

Dead witnesses.

Old evidence.

A potential dearth of jurors willing to step into a case that has been an international cauldron - and to deliver a death sentence.

Those will be just some of the possible challenges facing prosecutors if the 26-year-old case of Mumia Abu-Jamal proceeds to a new sentencing hearing, with a new jury deciding whether he should get life in prison or death for killing Philadelphia Police Officer Daniel Faulkner in 1981.

"It would be a most interesting sentencing hearing," predicted Center City lawyer Joseph J. McGill, who prosecuted the case in 1982 when he was an assistant district attorney.

The new hearing was ordered last week by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, which said Abu-Jamal must be sentenced to life in prison - or given a chance to persuade another jury that he deserves life, rather than death.

Philadelphia District Attorney Lynne M. Abraham said she would not accede to a life sentence. She is said to be considering a petition to the U.S. Supreme Court seeking to have the death sentence reinstated. Barring a successful appeal, or a change of mind by Abraham, a new penalty hearing will take place.

The court said the hearing must be held within 180 days, but appeals would delay the process, perhaps for up to a year or two. Abraham will leave office at the end of next year, which raises the possibility that her successor would inherit the case.

Meanwhile, Abu-Jamal's lawyer, Robert R. Bryan of San Francisco, said he would ask the full Third Circuit to reconsider the panel's refusal to grant a hearing on his contention that the prosecution intentionally excluded blacks from the 1982 jury.

Abu-Jamal is one of more than 125 death-row inmates in Pennsylvania who have won significant victories - new sentencing hearings or retrials - from judges at various levels of the state and federal court systems.

While about 75 of those cases have not reached final appellate decisions, approximately 55 inmates who had been facing execution are now serving life sentences. In some of those cases, prosecutors agreed to life rather than go through the rigors of a new penalty hearing.

"It's difficult to do. It's not impossible," said Philadelphia Common Pleas Court Judge Benjamin Lerner, who was chief public defender from 1975 to 1990 and now presides over homicide cases.
While Lerner would not comment on the prospect of another Abu-Jamal proceeding, he said such hearings come up from time to time when capital cases are reversed. "It's sort of like putting on the trial again, often without live witnesses being available," he said.

A redo of even part of Commonwealth v. Abu-Jamal would draw a dramatically different audience.

The 1982 trial captivated the Philadelphia region, but a new penalty hearing would draw international attention, with foreign journalists filing courtroom dispatches around the world.
Witnesses from the 1982 trial could be recalled, or their testimony read in the courtroom if they were dead or unable to be located.

Prosecutors also would likely try to find new information that could be used against Abu-Jamal, a former Black Panther and supporter of the radical group MOVE who has written five books and given taped commentaries and speeches from death row.

"I believe his whole background - his whole background - is going to be fair game," said McGill, who said he believed a new prosecutor could put on a persuasive case for death.

The penalty hearing almost certainly would draw a steady stream of Abu-Jamal's supporters: MOVE members, anti-death-penalty activists, academics who have examined the case, occasionally maybe an actor or entertainer who has rallied on his behalf.

McGill said one of the biggest problems might be selecting a jury in such an emotionally charged case.

Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond, said he would not be surprised if the hearing were moved out of Philadelphia so a jury could be chosen from a part of the state where the case hadn't received as much attention.

He also said there probably would be "all kinds of arguments" between prosecutors and defense lawyers about what evidence would be admissible.

As a result, he said, a new sentencing hearing would be a tough production. "It would be exceedingly difficult, but it wouldn't be impossible," Tobias said.

Bucks County District Attorney Michelle Henry knows the challenges of presenting an old case to a new jury.

She handled the retrial last year of death-row inmate Richard Laird, convicted in 1988 of murder in an antigay attack on an artist in Lower Bucks County.

"It's extremely challenging to put together a case that's almost 20 years old," Henry said. "Witnesses die. Memories diminish. Victims and witnesses often put the nightmare behind them. They sort of have closed the door on the case."

And then a retrial comes along.

Despite the challenges, Laird was convicted again of murder - and sentenced to death.

Henry said jurors, who weren't told that the original conviction had been overturned, seemed to wonder why they were deciding the case "all this time later."

Bryan, Abu-Jamal's lawyer, said he was not yet focusing on a new sentencing hearing because he still was fighting for a new trial and a chance for his client to be released from prison.

The Third Circuit panel upheld the 2001 decision by U.S. District Judge William H. Yohn Jr., who let stand the murder conviction, but threw out the death sentence. Yohn ruled that the jury in Abu-Jamal's 1982 trial might have mistakenly believed it had to agree unanimously on any "mitigating" circumstances - factors that might have persuaded it to decide on a life sentence instead of death.

He said that after Thursday's decision he spoke with Abu-Jamal, who was pleased that the court did not reinstate the death sentence. "It's a big, positive step," but just the first step, Bryan said. "I want him acquitted."

But if a new sentencing hearing is held, Bryan said, he would present a compelling portrait of Abu-Jamal as a man committed to human rights and women's rights, and outspoken about war, government corruption, and the policies of the Bush administration.

"I would not be about hiding him at all," Bryan said.

Contact staff writer Emilie Lounsberry at 215-854-4828 or elounsberry@phillynews.com.

Thursday, March 27, 2008

No death for Mumia Abu-Jamal - at least for now


By Emilie Lounsberry
INQUIRER STAFF WRITER

A federal appeals court today refused to reinstate the death sentence of world-famous death row inmate Mumia Abu-Jamal, but left intact his murder conviction in the 1981 shooting death of Philadelphia Police Officer Daniel Faulkner.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled that Abu-Jamal must be sentenced to life in prison or get a chance with a new Philadelphia jury, which would decide only whether he should get life in prison or be sentenced - again - to death.

The judges left intact his first-degree murder conviction, rejecting Abu-Jamal's claim that he deserves an entirely new trial and a chance to prove his innocence.

Abu-Jamal, who has written books and given taped speeches from death row, was convicted in 1982 by a Philadelphia jury of killing Faulkner, who was shot to death near 13th and Locust Streets in the early morning hours of Dec. 9, 1981.

The Third Circuit upheld, in all respects, the 2001 decision by U.S. District Judge William H. Yohn Jr., who rejected all but one of Abu-Jamal's legal claims, but threw out the jury's death sentence.

Yohn ruled that the jury in Abu-Jamal's 1982 trial may have mistakenly believed it had to agree unanimously on any "mitigating" circumstances -- factors that might have persuaded jurors to decide on a life sentence instead of death.

The appeals court affirmed that decision, and said that the state has six months to hold a new sentencing hearing for Abu-Jamal, or he must be sentenced to life in prison.

"The jury instructions and the verdict form created a reasonable likelihood that the jury believed it was precluded from finding a mitigating circumstance that had not been unanimously agreed upon," wrote Chief Judge Anthony J. Scirica in the 77-page opinion.

Judge Thomas L. Ambro wrote that he would have gone further than his two colleagues, and granted a hearing on Abu-Jamal's contention that the prosecution unfairly excluded blacks from his jury in violation of a 1986 U.S. Supreme Court case, Batson v. Kentucky.

"To move past the prima facie case is not to throw open the jailhouse doors and overturn Abu-Jamal's conviction," wrote Ambro. "It is merely to take the next step in deciding whether race was impermissibly considered during jury selection."

Abu-Jamal's lawyer, Robert R. Bryan of San Francisco, said yesterday that he was pleased that the death sentence was not reinstated, as prosecutors had wanted. But he expressed disappointment that only Ambro had wanted to grant relief on the claim that blacks were intentionally excluded from the jury.

"I am not happy that two of the three judges turned a deaf ear to the racism that permeated this case," said Bryan, who said he was "heartened and thrilled" by Ambro's dissent on that issue.
There was no immediate response from the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office. A spokeswoman said she expected District Attorney Lynne Abraham to hold a news conference later today.

Other Abu-Jamal supporters were unhappy with the ruling. They said rallies were being planned for as early as tomorrow outside federal courthouses in Philadelphia, New York and San Francisco.

"This was no victory, in any sense of the word," said Pam Africa, a member of the radical group MOVE.

"Today's decision is a travesty of justice," said Jeff Mackler, of Mobilization to Free Mumia Abu-Jamal. He said he had been hoping that the Third Circuit would order an entirely new trial based on the claim about racial discrimination in jury selection.

Mackler said he anticipates worldwide reaction to the disappointing decision. "Tomorrow is just an initial reaction," he said.

An appeal is virtually certain.

Either side could ask the panel to reconsider the decision, ask the entire Third Circuit to consider the case, or eventually ask the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene.

Monday, March 24, 2008

Drexel University Professor Wants To “Free The MOVE 9"



As of this writing, some 500 people have signed a petition calling for the parole of the remaining eight members of the "MOVE 9". Much like the petition to keep MOVE in prison, it is online and allows for comments. I can only think of how wonderful it would be to have a multitude of people sign "No Parole For MOVE" and than include on the petition a fact about the case ignored by the MOVE supporters. The website for the petition, allows you both to sign and read the signatures of others, as well as their comments.

After examining a fairly good, cross-section of the comments left by those who signed the petition, I discovered that few of those who are signing have anything near a clue about the case, and those who do, just about all of them make the mistake of believing that MOVE members are in jail solely for the murder of Officer James Ramp.

This "oversight", that is in actuality a reflection of ingrained, MOVE propaganda, not only denigrates the sacrifice of those public servants that MOVE members nearly killed in some cases, but also is a blatant attempt to revise the history of the group’s crimes in a way to increase the public support for the group.

Readers of this blog, those who were actually at the scene of the crime, and people who do their homework realize that the myth of "9 MOVE members in jail for the murder of one cop with one gun", is a grim fantasy espoused by inveterate liars, to be believed by fools.. Five hundred fools at last count.

Truth be told however, many of those who sign do not even parrot MOVE’s propaganda and instead come up with their own reasons for MOVE to be paroled. From those who clearly only view MOVE thru the prism of race, to those who will always, no matter what, support those who kill cops. These are people that do not even necessitate a lie for them to at act on MOVE’s behalf. As ideologues, they have allowed themselves to be hard-wired to only think critically about the "system", and ignore the crimes of those they share a political affinity for.

One name stuck out to me on the "Free The MOVE 9" petition, not only because of the geographical location of the signer, but because of the absolutism of his inaccurate comment.
His name is Dr. Robert Zaller and he may be teaching your kids History at Drexel University.
I find this interesting as Drexel University is very near the location where MOVE killed Officer James Ramp and nearly killed several other Police Officers and Firefighters as it is rare that anyone in Philadelphia is ignorant enough to support MOVE, but that an actual teacher of History makes the mistake to support killers is particularly notable. If that is what this man, who makes the point of being a Professor, and also name drops the University is doing online, one has to wonder what kind of teaching is going on in his class room.

And for the record, these are the comments of Dr. Zaller:


"270 years of collective punishment for the single shot that killed Officer James Ramp is surely sufficient by any yardstick of justice. No one was ever indicted, let alone punished, in the death of eleven MOVE members in 1985. I am not a member of MOVE, but a citizen seeking fairness and equity in the administration of justice. I hope that the Board of Probation and Parole will act favorably in this case, and help all Philadelphians begin a process of healing and reconciliation.
Sincerely, Dr. Robert Zaller Professor of History Drexel University"


I find the above comment repellant not just in it’s inaccuracies, but with the arrogance with which they are presented.

It is a fact that MOVE members are in prison for much more than the killing of James Ramp, something that the Professor either doesn’t know or pretends not to. And as un-important as these other ignored victims of MOVE are to people like Dr. Zaller, what is clearly important is to regurgitate MOVE’s tale of victimization while making the point that he isn’t a member of MOVE, as if that fact in and of itself is a mark of credibility.

He ends his plea for the release of un-repentant murderers on parole by arguing that in doing so there will "begin a process of healing and reconciliation" This of course, is one of those "feel good" platitudes employed by the herbivore left that echoes well through the halls of academia and allows for those inhabiting ivory towers to rest easier at night as they suffer through the delusion that everyone does indeed just want to get along.

However, Dr. Zaller fails to recognize that Philadelphians are hardly clamoring for such a process with MOVE, especially considering the fact that the MOVE members in jail remain defiantly absent of any sense of remorse or responsibility for their actions. Certainly, in terms of offensiveness, Dr. Zaller’s lack of empathy for MOVE’s victims are more egregious than those deluded children who are ready made fodder for MOVE propaganda. As a Professor, one would think that Zaller would at least feign intellectual curiosity, but it appears he has willingly abandoned his critical faculties in the name of ideology and a desire to make a political point in signing a petition in support of a reactionary, violent, and anti-intellectual, death cult that abuses the children in it’s midst.

Dr. Zaller does have a background in fighting against the death penalty, and I have no quarrel with him there, as I too, like an ever growing segment of the American populace, have an issue with murder by the state. Unlike the death penalty, where there are plenty of shades of grey, enough to keep the debate going on for years to come, the MOVE case is rather clear, that is of course, if you bother to do your homework. Dr. Zaller has failed to do his, and in doing so has made the mistake of blindly supporting the release of un-repentant cop-killers. Shame on him.
His action in support of those who killed a servant of the people of Philadelphia are a blight upon his profession and disgrace the University where he teaches.

Please send Professor Zaller an email and help educate him about the reality of MOVE.
He can be reached at robert.michael.zaller@drexel.edu and it is he who is in need of an education.

Sunday, March 23, 2008

Tony Allen On The Radio This Monday To Discuss MOVE Parole


March 24th Update: I spoke to the producer this morning and I am on confirmed to be on the 11:30pm segment

(Talk Show Host Dom Giordano)

It has not been 100% confirmed yet, but I am tentatively scheduled to appear on the Dom Giordano Radio show around 11pm. The show is on Philadelphia’s number one talk radio station, WPHT 1210AM and I am going to be on to discuss the possibility of MOVE members being let out on parole. Time permitting, I will attempt to discuss some other pertinent issues regarding MOVE. Those of you outside of the Philadelphia area can listen live online at http://domtalk.com/. Dom’s show is on from 9pm-1am week nights.



You can call his show at the following numbers:



In Philadelphia: (215) 839-1210 PA Suburbs: (610) 664-1210 South Jersey: (609) 541-1210 Most Cellphones: a free call…just hit #1210



For more information about the possibility of MOVE members being paroled go to http://antimove.blogspot.com/ and http://themoveorganization.com/



Sign the petition to keep MOVE in prison at:



http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/no-to-parole-for-the-move-9.html





(About Dom Giordano:
Which Philadelphia talk show host can judge the Miss Kensington Pageant one day, and talk with Mayor Micahel Nutter about a "New Day" in Philadelphia? Philadelphia marvel Dom Giordano. Dom offers an intelligent "guy next door" sensibility that's as comfortable as your favorite chair. Born and raised in South Philly, Dom’s local flavor makes him one of the region’s best-connected media personalities. Dom Giordano’s mix of compelling topics, great local callers and provocative guests produces fascinating talk radio. Dom began his unique path to broadcasting as a high school teacher in the Delaware Valley, where he received widespread media coverage for his innovative teaching and motivational techniques with his students. Giordano was hired at WWDB Radio in 1987, becoming the country's first teacher-turned-talk show host. "Talkers Magazine" named Dom one of the Top 100 Most Influential Talk Show Hosts in America for five years. Dom is a frequent guest commentator on the Fox News Channel, CNN's "Talkback Live", Court TV, "It's Your Call" on Comcast’s CN8, NBC-10 News, and WHYY-TV 12 News Programs. Dom also writes frequent columns for newspapers throughout the region, including "The Philadelphia Inquirer", "The Bucks County Courier Times", "The Main Line Times", and "The Northeast Times". Dom lives in Germantown with his wife Rosemary, and their two sons, Luke and DJ.)

Saturday, March 22, 2008

Continued Delays In Jamal Case


by John Hayden


The 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals has been deliberating on Philadelphia's most notorious cop killing case since May of last year.

The highest court in the land just decided a case that may impact the intermediate federal appeals court's decision on Mumia Abu Jamal's appeal from the portion of Judge William Yohn's 2001 decision that denied the Death-Row prisoner's habeas corpus petition demanding a new trial on the basis of racial discrimination during jury selection.

Mumia Abu Jamal and his San Francisco lawyer, Robert R. Bryan, claim that the 1982 prosecutor, ADA Joseph Mc Gill, deprived the Black defendant of his Constitutional right to equal protection of the law because he'd used 10 of his 20 peremptory challenges to eliminate "qualified Blacks" from the jury that eventually found the Black defendant guilty of capital murder, and then voted for "death" rather than life imprisonment.

That's the so-called Batson claim.

In 1986 the US Supreme Court tried to address the insidious prosecutorial practice north and south of the Mason Dixon line whereby prosecutors would purposefully discriminate against Blacks accused of crime by eliminating fellow Blacks from the jury through the exercise of peremptory (no reason given) challenges.

In Batson . Kentucky (1986) 476 US 79 the prosecutor used four peremptory challenges to eliminate all four potential Black jurors, thereby subjecting the Black defendant to a trial by an all-white jury (which convicted Mr. Batson of burglary). The Supreme Court nullified the conviction and gave Mr. Batson a new trial.

In the brand new case, Snyder v. Louisiana No. 06-10119, the prosecutor used five peremptory challenges to eliminate all five potential Black jurors, thereby subjecting the Black defendant to a trial by and all-white jury (which convicted him of capital murder).

To compound the unfairness, when defense counsel questioned a peremptory challenge to a Black college student, the prosecutor gave the Judge an "unconvincing" and "implausible" explanation for the challenge. This compelled the U S Supreme Court to infer a "discriminatory intent."

Chief Justice Samual Alito, a conservative jurist appointed by a conservative Republican president, wrote the opinion that reversed Mr. Snyder's murder conviction, and granted him a new trial.

Question: Will the recent Supreme Court ruling help the incarcerated radio Philadelphia journalist to obtain a new trial from the 3rd Circuit (or later from the Supreme Court) on his racial discrimination in jury selection claim?

Answer: No one knows.

However, if the 3rd Circuit Judges do grant Mumia Abu Jamal a new trial on his Batson claim, they'll have to completely ignore several record based facts:

1) The Black defendant's Black defense counsel didn't register a single objection to a single one of the 10 peremptory challenges exercised by ADA Joseph McGill.

2) Thus, the trial Judge never had the opportunity to assess whether or not the state's explanation for each challenge was either "race neutral" or racially motivated.

3) In Judge Yohn's 2001 decision, the short description of each of the prosecutor's challenges to 1o potential Black jurors indicate on their face that they were race neutral.

4) Four of the eliminated Blacks could easily have been the basis of a challenge for cause (#15 - "Black, listened to Abu Jamal on the radio, opposed to death penalty;" #1 "Black, bias against police, listened to Abu Jamal on the radio;" #2 - "Black, strong feelings against death penalty; #7 Black, hesitant in answering questions, strong reservations about the death penalty). Any rational Judge would have eliminated all three individuals for lack of impartiality.

5) The other six potential Black jurors had either listened to the accused on the radio (#3, #5, #11,#13) or had a close family member who'd worked at Abu Jamal's radio station(#14), or had a hearing problem (#9). These were obviously racially neutral and not race- based reasons for the challenges.

6) The 1st and 2nd jurors intentionally selected by McGill were, like the accused murderer, Black.

7) The allegedly racially motivated prosecutor intentionally selected a total of four members of the defendant's race for the jury.

8) The defendant himself used a peremptory challenge to eliminate one of the four qualified Blacks that was acceptable to the prosecutor, and whom he wanted on the fact-finding panel.

9) When the racially mixed jury was sworn in, the prosecutor had five unused peremptory challenges left. If Abu Jamal's prosecutor, like Mr. Batson's and Mr. Synder's prosecutor, possessed a biased intention to racially discriminate, he would have used four of the five to eliminate the four Blacks he'd intentionally selected.

On the merits the 3rd Circuit should rule in favor of the prosecution, and the murder victim, Officer Danny Faulkner, whom Mumia Abu Jamal shot in the back and in the face in front of severral eyewitnesses over 26 years ago.

(John Hayden is the author of "Mumia Abu-Jamal: The Patron Saint of American Cop-Killers" which is available at Amazon.com and is currently working on another book on the case titled "Mumia Abu Jamal - The Political Prisoner" which is to be published in late summer of this year. He is a former attorney, who has written numerous articles about Jamal's case for this site and appeared on NPR to speak on the case. To contact Mr. Hayden please email the antimove blog at sept27th2002@yahoo.com and we will forward inquiries to him)

Thursday, March 20, 2008

MOVE, Parole, And August 8th




If you Goggle MOVE and parole you will come across website after website pasted with MOVE’s exhortations to send letters and make calls to the Parole Board in an effort to convince the board that the "MOVE 9" be released.

Having worked on this site and against MOVE for the past few years, I am convinced that if there were ever a time for people who know the truth about MOVE to speak up, than this is it.
Too often, there is little people can do about MOVE other than to raise awareness about the group and even with that there is only so much that can be said.

Now is the chance to really do something in order to help make sure that the most violent of MOVE members not be allowed to breath the free air, while their victims remain either in the ground or others whose bodies were so shot up that they could not ever return to work and were forced out of their career.

For these victims, there is no "parole", their scars and debilitating injuries will never go away and the family of Police Officer Ramp doesn’t get a reprieve from their loss.

If you add to this equation the fact that MOVE members have not ever taken responsibility for their crime, the audaciousness of MOVE becomes that much apparent.. And it is not as if they are unaware of what they did. They know full well, yet their moral compasses do not function in the way that a normal persons would. From years of indoctrination, these MOVE members would have no doubts as to whether murdering a cop was acceptable or not. Nor would they have lost any sleep about lying about it for the last three decades.

For MOVE, it is known that "what is necessary is right and what is right is necessary". Because the Powelton Village confrontation was instigated by MOVE and planned out by it’s leader, John Africa, the necessity of it would have been unquestionable to those whom were participating in it.

The plan of course, was to engage the Police in a gunfight from fortified positions in a violent attempt to kick off "JOHN AFRICA’s" revolution. No matter what, MOVE would claim to be the victims as they had seen in the past people’s revulsion to what was seen as Mayor Rizzo’s heavy handedness towards to the group. This gun battle where hundreds of mostly white cops were observed by the world firing at a home filled with black women and children was, by design, intended to place the Police in between a rock in a hard place.


MOVE members had holed up in the basement of their HQ and made sure that no cameras would be able to observe them firing at the Police. They also held their fire until the Police and Firemen were exposed and vulnerable. And when they did open up, it is somewhat of a miracle that more people were not killed. In the video of the confrontation you can hear the opening shots and the police and firefighters holding their ground as if they were stunned and in disbelief over what they were hearing until they began to see people around them get hit. They retreat backwards, but it must not have been easy to find cover quickly, especially for the firemen who at the outbreak of the shooting were holding heavy hoses shooting water into the MOVE house and were wearing heavy equipment and coats in the heat of August.

While I was still with MOVE, I heard the story of John Africa watching the shootout on TV and how the MOVE members with him were shaken and fearful for their comrades as the event unfolded. It was said that John Africa was completely calm. I believe that his serenity stemmed from the fact that this bloodshed and chaos was exactly what he wanted. The confrontation that he had been working for so long to achieve was finally happening. And it was very possible that those around him did not know of his plans in an absolute kind of way.

MOVE is an inherently secretive cult, even in terms of what they tell each other. If you do not need to know something than they try to keep you in the dark about it, even simple things are handled this way. These kinds of tactics allowed for a plausible denial and ensured that even if a MOVE member were to leave the group that their knowledge would be limited and potentially self-incriminating. For example, if you were aware that MOVE sold drugs, as has been alleged, you probably wouldn’t have known about it unless you were up to your neck in it.

The same would have been the case in 1978. It is very possible that there were people in the house who were largely unaware of the exact nature of the plan until it was too late. They would have simply been told their "activity" was to do as they were told by whomever was in charge.
John Africa had reportedly hand picked the MOVE members he wanted to be in the fight with Police and by all accounts he had done well. Delbert Africa, whom would be identified as the person most likely in charge that day was a former military man who had also spent time as a Black Panther. He would have been comfortable with firearms, constructing basic fortifications, and as one of John Africa’s most loyal followers, ideologically committed to carrying out his tasks. Chuck Africa was the nephew of John Africa and had spent his formative years under the thumb of MOVE’s leader and was similarly ideologically committed as MOVE was pretty much all he knew. Mike Africa, Phil Africa, and Eddie Africa were basically street thugs when they came to MOVE and would hold fast to those street elements that would have made them ideal for this kind of operation.

The women and children were a necessary component to the plan as was excluding any white MOVE members or supporters from the confrontation. John Africa clearly wanted to stock the house with as many "innocent" women and children who were black as a way to exploit the situation as one fueled by blood-thirsty, bigoted cops, who wanted to kill women and children of color (this was the same tactic he would use in 1985)

One of the MOVE women, Debbie Africa was pregnant at the time of the confrontation. This makes one wonder just how concerned she was for the safety of her child if she would put them into a situation that even seemed like it would be potentially violent. Yet there she was. This fact just underscores just how much control John Africa had over his devotees, even if he was hiding out in Rochester NY, hundreds of mile away. One could imagine the nightmare of controversy the city would have had to contend with should a very pregnant Debbie Africa have been killed by Police during the firefight.

Of course, we know that the only person to lose their life that day would be James Ramp and MOVE would do and say anything in order to deny responsibility for his death.
However, as I have monitored the statements of the MOVE 9 for some time now, I have noticed that they are not only making less statements less frequently, but that they are steering clear of advancing the conspiracy theories about "friendly fire" with regards to August 8th, 1978 and are avoiding the issue all together. In the latest article by one of the MOVE 9, this one by Chuck Africa, there isn’t even any mention of August 8th or his supposed "unjust imprisonment". Instead is a lecture about the plight of elderly and the infirm in prison. This turn from self-absorbed, defiant revolutionary, to a wannabe "voice of the voiceless" is as contrived and as full of plagiarized concern and emotion as is possible.

It is hard to say if this more quieter, less abrasive, version of the MOVE 9 has anything to do with the impending parole hearings or not. If indeed it is, than I certainly hope that the Parole Board looks beyond the little con-job that MOVE is attempting to pull and sees the true face of an Organization dedicated to hatred and destruction.

Finally, I am compelled to urge people to continue in their efforts to keep the MOVE members in jail. Don’t be deluded into believing that it can’t happen. A letter to the parole board takes a few minutes, a phone call just as long, and signing a petition, just a few seconds.
Towards Justice!

Saturday, March 15, 2008

Howard Zinn's Bad MOVE


Please contact Professor Zinn and let him know the truth about the group that he is supporting.

CAS Political Science
232 Bay State Road

Office phone
617-353-3796

hzinn@bu.edu







Howard Zinn author of some 20 books, is currently Professor Emeritus in the Political Science Department at Boston University and more importantly an intellectual icon of the far-left. He has embraced MOVE, first by narrating a propaganda film for the group and now by lending his name and reputation to the efforts to obtain parole for the "MOVE 9". As I hope to demonstrate here, he is woefully misinformed about the subject and I do hope that someone close to him is able to reach him with the information that he is supporting a child-raping cult, that is explicitly authoritarian and violent.

The "documentary" Zinn narrated, such that it is one, borrows heavily from an earlier pro-MOVE film, and is more so a display of how ideology fused with ignorance can come together and to the uninitiated at least, seem like an assessment of what MOVE is. MOVE could not have asked for a better advertisement for the only real commodity they have, their identity as an "Organization" of perpetual persecution as a result of their dedication to the "protection of life". It is a false depiction offered up by two young film makers who had become bleary eyed and abandoned any pretense of impartiality in their desire to please their new friends in MOVE.
I was "in" MOVE during the production of the film and became aware of how it was being done and the fact that the goal of the film, whatever it started to out to be, ended up as a presentation of MOVE’s version of the truth as opposed to the much more complex and nuanced truth that such a subject deserves.
Howard Zinn brought the film an air of instant credibility because of his participation in it. Zinn, along with Noam Chomsky provide a significant portion of the intellectual foundation of the far-left and his seminal book, "A People’s History Of The United States" is acclaimed the world over.
Whether one agrees or not with his politics, there should be no doubt that Zinn has a powerful intellect and a passion for the underdog and especially for those whose stories history has left behind. That said, the fact that he is a partisan whose personal convictions have apparently left him unable or unwilling to turn his critical mind towards anything other than the "power structure". This is by definition anti-intellectualism and is the flaw that allows Zinn to be duped into believing the absurd.
So now, after having narrated the horrifically flawed MOVE documentary, Zinn again is lending his name in support of the cult thru his signing of a "Free The MOVE 9" petition and with a letter he sent to the parole board.
I will preface my comments about this by writing that I have no real issue with the concept of parole. People can change. I am an example of that and I know many others who have done likewise and I am not comfortable with the idea of shackling someone forever for what may have been their worst moment, especially when they were under the influence of a cult leader who had a penchant for scrambling people’s sense of morality.
If these MOVE members in question had taken the time in jail to act in repentance, change their lives, disavow their violent acts, and work to keep others from making their mistakes, I would not be so against the idea of their being paroled. They certainly would have much to answer for even if they had did all of the above. However, none of these things have occurred.
MOVE members have never taken responsibility for their actions, never apologized, have induced people to join their group, and have taken the audacious position that the men who were their victims were shot down by their own fellow officers. The evidence presented against them was clear and the proof of this was found in the fact that MOVE responded to the evidence by attempting to turn the courtroom proceedings into a Manson-esque affair, which only delayed the convictions which were inevitable.
I seriously doubt that Howard Zinn, in preparation for his letter of support for MOVE members took into consideration the evidence against them or even what they were ultimately convicted of. He notes that a "man was killed", which makes me wonder if he even knows that man’s name. But fails to mention that several other men were shot and some of those who were wounded were nearly killed, escaping death only through the prompt medical treatment they received and the fortune to not have been struck anywhere in which they could have been killed instantly. Zinn apparently doesn’t realize these victims of MOVE even existed and I can only believe that the fact that he cannot even acknowledge the depth of MOVE’s crimes in his letter pleading for their release will not help MOVE’s cause.
While Zinn cannot even bother to refer to the man who MOVE murdered, James Ramp, but he certainly does not fail in his letter to mention the events of May 13th, 1985 and does so in the context of furthering MOVE’s narrative of perpetual victimization. From my perspective, the mention of May 13th really helps to make the point that MOVE members, at the very least, have a few issues insofar as their dealings with the rest of the world go. Certainly you cannot blame imprisoned MOVE members for the crimes of the MOVE members outside jail, that is unless you could show some kind of causality, which I don’t think is possible. It is rather clear that it was John Africa who was calling the shots, not the "MOVE 9", although one could argue that they had given MOVE’s leader their children when they had gone on their little mission for their fearless leader.
Zinn does get one thing correct in his letter when he claims that the events of August 8th 1978 shouldn’t have happened. Indeed they shouldn’t have. However, John Africa’s devotees had done all within their power to insure that the confrontation occur and they did this under the instruction of Africa himself and thru his proxies. They wanted it to happen. It did happen and now they are crying foul when faced with the consequences of their actions. It really is a pathetic display of deluded arrogance and shows us the face of evil.
Another example of Zinn’s ignorance with regards to the MOVE issue is his statement that he "understand(s) they have been model prisoners". This is a really classless way of saying that is what he has been told and is essentially a rhetorical trick that gives him a way to shirk responsibility for disseminating inaccurate information. And for the record, MOVE members have been anything but model prisoners.
During their trial, MOVE members instigated numerous incidents, many of which were violent, which led them to be barred from the courtroom for large portions of their own trial. Since they have been in prison, they have instigated full on prison riots, of which they are rather proud of. I can certainly recall my numerous visits with MOVE members in jail in which the topic of conversations were MOVE’s fights with prison guards and purposeful disobedience with regards to prison policy. MOVE members have routinely been placed in administrative segregation as they seem to be of the opinion that their role as convicted murderers has allowed them the right to go by their own set of rules and that they are allowed manipulate their environment as they see fit. From my view, this hardly makes them eligible for early release. The people of Philadelphia are in no need of an influx of spoiled brat cultists, who murdered a Police Officer, and who will only aid and abet MOVE’s current run of criminality.
If Howard Zinn and others want to take the position that MOVE members have served enough time, he ought to know that the time they are serving is just not for the murder of Officer Ramp, but also for the attempted murder of other Officers and Firefighters. He needs to realize that MOVE members have been anything but "model" prisoners, and although both May 13th 1985 and August 8th 1978 were unnecessary tragedies, they were tragedies instigated by MOVE, at the expense of those around them, their own children and the children of other MOVE members, the community, and law enforcement tasked with dealing with their cult-inspired violence.
It is a sad testament to Zinn’s credibility and integrity that he is apparently taking positions without knowing the truth, and if he does no the truth and is taking up for MOVE anyways, than he is worse off than I thought.
Below is Zinn’s letter to the parole board.
Dear Ms. McVey:

I have studied the case of the eight prisoners of the MOVE organization and believe very strongly that they deserve to be released from prison. This is a situation which cries out for compassion. A man was killed in 1978 and, as I understand it, the sentencing judge said he had no idea who fired the fatal bullet. In a bombing attack against their organization by the Philadelphia police eleven of their friends and relatives, six adults and five children, died from the resulting fire. A jury found in 1996 that excessive force was used by the city of Philadelphia in that incident. These eight people have been in prison for thirty years, paying an exorbitant price for a series of events that should never have taken place. As I understand, they have been model prisoners. They are not violent people. There is every reason to believe they will be productive members of the community if released. I ask you to approve their petition for parole.

Howard Zinn
Professor Emeritus, Boston University

Thursday, March 13, 2008

"No Parole For MOVE 9" Letter To Parole Board




(The following is another example of the fine letters being sent by readers of this site regarding the parole of MOVE members. We need more of this. Direct and to the point. Thanks to everyone for the petition signatures and letters. Towards Justice.)


Ms. Catherine Mc Vey
Chairperson-Pa. Board of Probation & Parole
1101 South Front St., S. #5100
Harrisburg, Pa. 17104-2517
717-787-5699

Dear Chairperson Mc Vey and Parole Board Members:

I write as a journalist familiar with the events of August 8, 1978 which resulted in the trial and conviction of the MOVE 9 for murder, attempted murder, aggravated assault, and conspiracy.

Eight of these extraordinarily violent anarchstic cult members are eligible for parole in April.

In determining whether of not to release these convicted murderers back into society, please take the following into consideration:

1. They intentionally shot and killed a 52 year old cop, Officer James Ramp, in the performance of his duties;

2. With their fussilade of gunfire from rifles and shotguns they also tried to murder five (5) other police officers and four (4) firemen;

3. They succeeded in seriously wounded these nine public servants, who, like Officer Ramp, were performing their duties in a lawful manner;

4. But for excellent emergency medical treatment - and plain old fashioned good luck - the bloody August 8, 1978 event would have been a mass murder by these homicidally violent cult members.

5. They've never taken responsibility for their crimes. They've never even hinted that they are in fact "guilty" of the crimes which resulted in their removal from society.
.
6. Despite ample opportunity - 30 years - to see the error of their homicidal, anti society, anti law enforcement, anarchistic ways, all eight of these cult members are unrepentent.

None of them has shown a shred of remorse for their serious crimes.

Indeed they deem themselves "political prisoners."

Surely absent some indication of remorse, which is an essential component of rehabiltation, none of them are worthy of being returned to society, especially if they return to the MOVE cult in the city of Philadelphia.

The citizens of that city, the African American Mayor, the African American police commissioner, the thousands of police officers, and the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office have an extremely difficult task in trying to manage the present horrible murder rate.

Putting a single one of these "political prisoners" back into society will make the city even more dangerous, and make law enforcement's already difficult job virtually impossible.

Parole denial would protect the safety of society and further the intersts of criminal justice.

Thursday, March 06, 2008

MOVE, Parole, And August 8th

Keep MOVE In Jail http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/no-to-parole-for-the-move-9.html


(Officer Ramp lays on the ground after being shot dead by a MOVE member)


If you Goggle MOVE and parole you will come across website after website pasted with MOVE’s exhortations to send letters and make calls to the Parole Board in an effort to convince the board that the "MOVE 9" be released.

Having worked on this site and against MOVE for the past few years, I am convinced that if there were ever a time for people who know the truth about MOVE to speak up, than this is it.
Too often, there is little people can do about MOVE other than to raise awareness about the group and even with that there is only so much that can be said.

Now is the chance to really do something in order to help make sure that the most violent of MOVE members not be allowed to breath the free air, while their victims remain either in the ground or others whose bodies were so shot up that they could not ever return to work and were forced out of their career.

For these victims, there is no "parole", their scars and debilitating injuries will never go away and the family of Police Officer Ramp doesn’t get a reprieve from their loss.

If you add to this equation the fact that MOVE members have not ever taken responsibility for their crime, the audaciousness of MOVE becomes that much apparent.. And it is not as if they are unaware of what they did. They know full well, yet their moral compasses do not function in the way that a normal persons would. From years of indoctrination, these MOVE members would have no doubts as to whether murdering a cop was acceptable or not. Nor would they have lost any sleep about lying about it for the last three decades.

For MOVE, it is known that "what is necessary is right and what is right is necessary". Because the Powelton Village confrontation was instigated by MOVE and planned out by it’s leader, John Africa, the necessity of it would have been unquestionable to those whom were participating in it.
The plan of course, was to engage the Police in a gunfight from fortified positions in a violent attempt to kick off "JOHN AFRICA’s" revolution. No matter what, MOVE would claim to be the victims as they had seen in the past people’s revulsion to what was seen as Mayor Rizzo’s heavy handedness towards to the group. This gun battle where hundreds of mostly white cops were observed by the world firing at a home filled with black women and children was, by design, intended to place the Police in between a rock in a hard place. MOVE members had holed up in the basement of their HQ and made sure that no cameras would be able to observe them firing at the Police. They also held their fire until the Police and Firemen were exposed and vulnerable. And when they did open up, it is somewhat of a miracle that more people were not killed. In the video of the confrontation you can hear the opening shots and the police and firefighters holding their ground as if they were stunned and in disbelief over what they were hearing until they began to see people around them get hit. They retreat backwards, but it must not have been easy to find cover quickly, especially for the firemen who at the outbreak of the shooting were holding heavy hoses shooting water into the MOVE house and were wearing heavy equipment and coats in the heat of August.

While I was still with MOVE, I heard the story of John Africa watching the shootout on TV and how the MOVE members with him were shaken and fearful for their comrades as the event unfolded. It was said that John Africa was completely calm. I believe that his serenity stemmed from the fact that this bloodshed and chaos was exactly what he wanted. The confrontation that he had been working for so long to achieve was finally happening. And it was very possible that those around him did not know of his plans in an absolute kind of way.

MOVE is an inherently secretive cult, even in terms of what they tell each other. If you do not need to know something than they try to keep you in the dark about it, even simple things are handled this way. These kinds of tactics allowed for a plausible denial and ensured that even if a MOVE member were to leave the group that their knowledge would be limited and potentially self-incriminating. For example, if you were aware that MOVE sold drugs, as has been alleged, you probably wouldn’t have known about it unless you were up to your neck in it.

The same would have been the case in 1978. It is very possible that there were people in the house who were largely unaware of the exact nature of the plan until it was too late. They would have simply been told their "activity" was to do as they were told by whomever was in charge.
John Africa had reportedly hand picked the MOVE members he wanted to be in the fight with Police and by all accounts he had done well. Delbert Africa, whom would be identified as the person most likely in charge that day was a former military man who had also spent time as a Black Panther. He would have been comfortable with firearms, constructing basic fortifications, and as one of John Africa’s most loyal followers, ideologically committed to carrying out his tasks.

Chuck Africa was the nephew of John Africa and had spent his formative years under the thumb of MOVE’s leader and was similarly ideologically committed as MOVE was pretty much all he knew. Mike Africa, Phil Africa, and Eddie Africa were basically street thugs when they came to MOVE and would hold fast to those street elements that would have made them ideal for this kind of operation.

The women and children were a necessary component to the plan as was excluding any white MOVE members or supporters from the confrontation. John Africa clearly wanted to stock the house with as many "innocent" women and children who were black as a way to exploit the situation as one fueled by blood-thirsty, bigoted cops, who wanted to kill women and children of color (this was the same tactic he would use in 1985)

One of the MOVE women, Debbie Africa was pregnant at the time of the confrontation. This makes one wonder just how concerned she was for the safety of her child if she would put them into a situation that even seemed like it would be potentially violent. Yet there she was. This fact just underscores just how much control John Africa had over his devotees, even if he was hiding out in Rochester NY, hundreds of mile away. One could imagine the nightmare of controversy the city would have had to contend with should a very pregnant Debbie Africa have been killed by Police during the firefight.

Of course, we know that the only person to lose their life that day would be James Ramp and MOVE would do and say anything in order to deny responsibility for his death.

However, as I have monitored the statements of the MOVE 9 for some time now, I have noticed that they are not only making less statements less frequently, but that they are steering clear of advancing the conspiracy theories about "friendly fire" with regards to August 8th, 1978 and are avoiding the issue all together. In the latest article by one of the MOVE 9, this one by Chuck Africa, there isn’t even any mention of August 8th or his supposed "unjust imprisonment". Instead is a lecture about the plight of elderly and the infirm in prison. This turn from self-absorbed, defiant revolutionary, to a wannabe "voice of the voiceless" is as contrived and as full of plagiarized concern and emotion as is possible.

It is hard to say if this more quieter, less abrasive, version of the MOVE 9 has anything to do with the impending parole hearings or not. If indeed it is, than I certainly hope that the Parole Board looks beyond the little con-job that MOVE is attempting to pull and sees the true face of an Organization dedicated to hatred and destruction.

Tuesday, March 04, 2008

Letter To The Inquirer: "No Parole For MOVE"


(pic of myself, MOVE supporters, and members of "The MOVE 9")


No parole, MOVE




As a former supporter of MOVE who understands the nature of the group and now rejects its "teachings," I oppose parole for any MOVE members ("7 MOVE members coming up for parole," Feb. 28).

I once spent many days and nights working for their freedom, corresponding with them, and visiting them in prison. As the years wore on, the facts became clear, and I realized that I was not supporting "political prisoners," but murderers who exploited my idealism. I had to face the fact that not only had I been lied to, but also that I had misled people. The tragedy of Aug. 8, 1978 - in which Philadelphia Police Officer James Ramp was killed - was of MOVE's making. The police were the victims, not MOVE.

Granting parole for MOVE members would compound the tragedy of August 1978. The parole board would be rewarding MOVE members who maintain their innocence and have never acknowledged their role in the murder of Ramp.

The judge who sentenced the MOVE members said the idea of rehabilitation for those who killed Ramp was "absurd." I believe the judge's comment to be as true now as it was three decades ago. There must not be parole for the killers of Officer James Ramp. Not now, not ever.

Tony Allen

Sunday, March 02, 2008


(Pam Africa)

Pam Africa is again making her way to NYC in an attempt to beg for money for her "continued legal work". The event is goint to be a"brunch with Pam" on Sunday, March 9, 2008 at 1:00 PM at a venue usually dedicated towards music called "Sistas’ Place" in Brooklyn



I wasn’t aware that Pam had passed the bar exam or that leader of the International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia and MOVE member had anything to do with the legal end of the Jamal effort.



In previous fund-raising efforts, there had always been a distinction made between "legal" and "organizing" monies. This is the first time that I can recall the line being blurred between the two. It is also worth noting that the information about the fund-raising is somewhat ambiguous.
It is unclear whether the money raised will be going towards Jamal’s legal efforts, that of the MOVE 9, or whether there is some other as of yet, un-named legal issue for which the money is to be used.



This event is being billed as a "Tribute To A Warrior" and is set to include anti-Police, NYC Councilman, Charles Barron and a host of other crypto-Marxists fringe groups, as well as the usual menagerie of organizations dedicated to the outdated philosophy of identity politics.



I find it repugnant that anyone of any political persuasion would find it within themselves to consider Pam Africa to be a "warrior". At best, she is a con artist for a penchant for contorting the word "motherfucker" and punctuating every other spoken sentence with "and uh you know."



At worst, she is a keeper of MOVE’s most odious secrets of child abuse and murder and Mumia Abu-Jamal’s most dedicated inveterate liar who exploits the movement for her own personal gain, both monetary and otherwise.



The seldom, if every employed, Pam Africa lives off of the blood of Officer Faulkner as she ruthlessly exploits his murder and celebrates his murderer, Mumia. There has never been a lie about the case that she hasn’t employed and has never once admitted being wrong about anything in her so-called pursuit for justice. As one pro-Mumia lie gives way to another after being exposed as such, she simply modifies her propaganda accordingly. Anyone who takes the time to read her public pronouncements of several years and compare them with ones from today will easily discover just how much they have changed as Jamal’s attorneys and the story of his innocence changes. The absurdity of it all apparently has no effect on the dedication of Pam Africa. Ever the cynic, and master manipulator, she will not let a little thing like the truth impede her career of self-aggrandizement.



That she gets away with all of this with some people is hardly a miracle. What she lacks in factuality, she makes up for in sheer audacity. As the appointed gatekeeper to Mumia , it pays to be in good with her, if you want access to the convicted cop-killer. She also has developed a cult of personality of sorts. It is of the nature that people are not so much interested in what she is saying, but in how she is saying it. She has all the trademarks of street hustler who knows how to handle an audience and has a knack for knowing when to be sweet and feign concern and when to be loud and over the top.



There are some other things that people should know about Pam Africa.



-During a Mumia fund-raiser in NYC at Madison Square Garden, Pam let it be known exactly what she thought about the man Mumia killed, Officer Faulkner, by referring to him as a "monster". She left out the part about how just hours before Mumia killed him, this "monster" had made a trip to the hospital to visit a little black girl who had been the victim of a sexual assault. She has made wild accusations against Officer Faulkner’s widow and in a press conference in December again accused Maureen Faulkner of being a "liar."



-She is also a criminal who has been arrested 10 times and found guilty 5 times on charges varying from simple assault and contempt of court. She is also a prominent member of MOVE, but not a "leader" of the sect as has been asserted by the media. Her role in the group is to follow orders and to provide a voice and a face to the Jamal movement.



-Pam apparently does not distinguish the distinction between MOVE and ICFFMAJ and one can bet that many an activist who thought they were donating their hard earned money to Mumia instead had it diverted to MOVE. There were many occasions when I had seen the large, water cooler container that served as the donation jar for Mumia end up at MOVE’s Headquarters and not at the Mumia office.



- Pam Africa, not only endorses the MOVE practice of child-rape, but she has quite willingly gave over her two young daughters to serve as examples. One of her daughters gave birth at 12, the other was not much older when she was initiated into the group’s deviant sexual practices. This act of child rape is not anything that MOVE denies. That this fact remains un-reported in any media outlet, "mainstream" or "alternative" is shameful. Yet I have it from an email directly from Ramona Africa when she wrote that "Women in MOVE do marry and have babies at what this american society might now consider to be a young age but we follow the coordination of Mother Nature who coordinates it such that she determines when a woman is ready for marriage and babies, which is when a woman has her monthly period, then she is ready to have babies and be married. It's just that simple." Indeed, it is that simple. It is child rape no matter how benign or as "natural" as Ramona would like it to be. Not only do I have Ramona’s words to confirm this, but knew these barely pubescent girls were pregnant and that is was being done by design. In fact they are quite proud that they can force young girls to become baby-making machines for their cult. And if this were not bad enough, these children of MOVE can barely, if at all read. The memory of watching second generation MOVE members with children of their own, struggling thru Dr. Suess books will remain forever be burned into my mind.



-As a MOVE member, Pam Africa holds onto some of the most reactionary, retrograde, ideas of the political spectrum. While MOVE practices overt child abuse, the group also holds reactionary views that should astonish and repulse anyone remotely concerned with basic human rights, not to speak of progressive politics. For MOVE, homosexuality is a disturbing and immoral violation of God’s Law. Reproductive rights are viewed by MOVE as a symbol of societies degradation and devaluation of life. Education for example, in MOVE exists only if it coincides with the rambling lunacy of JOHN AFRICA’s so-called wisdom. The children of MOVE are taught to see the world as a terrifying place with police assassins hiding around every corner. In MOVE, your children are not your own, they are the property of MOVE. And if anyone has any doubts as to the veracity of this last sentence I would urge you to look no further than the terrible saga of John Gilbride for proof.



I can accept the notion that many people who work with Pam and support her work for Muima are unaware of these facts and find these assertions difficult to belief. If that is the case, than I challenge those who disbelieve what I have written about her to go and ask her whether this is true or not. Does she dare deny the ages her daughters, Pixie, and Rose gave birth? Has she ever offered a full accounting of the money she has raised over the years? Could she deny that MOVE is explicitly anti-gay and anti-choice? She can certainly try, however there are many around her who know the truth about such things and keep these truths hidden away for obvious reasons. And these are people who ought to know better. People like Dr. Suzanne Ross for example. As a Clinical Psychologist she must be fully aware of the implications of children growing up in a world of sexual deviancy and intellectual depravation, yet she stands fully behind Pam Africa and dare not ever say anything that may interrupt her role as co-chair of the NYC Free Mumia coalition. Her life in "Mumiaworld" obviously more important than taking a stand against enforced ignorance and child-rape.



I would argue that giving Pam Africa money is a less than oblique way of endorsing and enabling the abuse of children. Furthermore, it is bad enough to be taken in by the fraudulent Mumia movement, but to assist in lining the pockets of a woman who does not now, and has not ever, accounted for the money she has taken in is even worse.



There are legitimate movements for change, the abolition of the death penalty, and for fighting racism that are deserving of support. MOVE is not an entity that truly represents any of those ideals. It is a group that preaches the preservation of life, yet whose history is rife with violence and the death of innocent people including children, from pointless and suicidal "confrontations" with authorities. MOVE is itself so rife with internal contradictions and hypocrisy that it ceases to be anything other than an authoritarian sect, bent on controlling the lives of those around them, as they cling tenaciously to anything that smacks of legitimacy. Pam Africa is a part of all of that and deserves not to be honored, but someone worthy of scorn. A coward, who sacrificed her little, innocent girls upon the altar of MOVE’s sexual subjugation, who parrots the lies of those around her, all the while out there drumming up support for a man for whose guilt or innocence is irrelevant to her because she is simply following the orders ostensibly given to her by MOVE’s founder John Africa.



Having been effectively run out of Philly, Pam’s fund-raiser is being held at



Sistas' Place


456 Nostrand Ave,


Brooklyn NYA or C train to Nostrand - Corner of Nostrand & Jefferson Aves - Entrance on Jefferson Ave



Anyone at all concerned with the fact that this establishment is providing a facility for a women that celebrates cop-killers, is a member of a cult that abuses children, amongst countless other nefarious things should contact this facility and make your feelings known.



Their website is http://sistasplace.org/index.html and their email and phone number is as follows



Melchilzedek Productions:


718.237.1246 / ahmedian@aol.com


718.467.1527 / upoverjazzpromo@aol.com



Those who are scheduled to appear at the event are:
Sediq Sundiata
NYC Councilman Charles Barron
Dr. James McIntosh
Committee to Eliminate Media Offensive to African People
Suzanne Ross
Free Mumia Coalition
Elombe Brath
Patrice Lumumba Coalition
Larry Holmes
International Action Center
Viola Plummer
December 12th Movement
Amina Baraka
& many more

Hit Counter
Online Schools