Bloody Sunday

mlf-18

King Duncan:
Is execution done on Cawdor? Are not
Those in commission yet return’d?

Malcolm:
My liege,
They are not yet come back. But I have spoke
With one that saw him die; who did report
That very frankly he confessed his treasons,
Implor’d your Highness’ pardon, and set forth
A deep repentance. Nothing in his life
Became him like the leaving it.

Macbeth Act 1, scene 4, 1–8

It is becoming increasingly clear that Louis Farrakhan’s duties at Newark Mosque #25 on the 21st of February 1965 went beyond mere lecturing. More than likely, Farrakhan had been assigned to serve as the de facto ‘interim minister’ of that temple for the day and quite possibly in the week(s) leading up to Sunday the 21st of February. This would have placed him in charge of all Fruit of Islam (FOI) and Muslim Girls in Training (MGT) members at Mosque #25 and made him the person to whom they all reported. As such it would have likely been Farrakhan’s responsibility to assign Newark FOI lieutenant Agurs Linward X Cathcart (aka Abdul Karriem Muhammad) to the Audubon Ballroom that afternoon in order to serve as the supervisor of the Mosque #25 hit squad which had been assigned to murder Malcolm X and it would have been to Farrakhan, in turn, to whom Lieutenant Cathcart was to report the outcome of their mission.

This may further explain why Cathcart, following Malcolm’s assassination (and by his own admission), lingered behind at the Audubon Ballroom and, among other things, conversed with the famous Harlem bookseller Lewis Michaux. It would also confirm the infamous “laughing lieutenant” account contained in Peter Goldman’s 1979 biography The Death and Life of Malcolm X. Cathcart’s purpose in loitering at the venue following the shooting is highly suggestive of his role that afternoon, namely, to await news regarding Malcolm’s condition. There is a further possibility that Cathcart may have even accompanied Malcolm’s bullet-riddled corpse to the Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Centre and, upon learning that Malcolm had succumbed to his injuries, Cathcart likely sought out a nearby phone booth in order to relay the news to Farrakhan. Farrakhan would have then contacted Supreme Captain Raymond Sharrieff or National Secretary John Ali and provided them with a definitive report.

Please FOLLOW us on Facebook and SIGN the #MalcolmX PETITION.

Advertisements

A Letter to Jimmy Breslin

jbs-2

Dear Mr Breslin,

A number of recent articles have appeared in connection with an apparent tip-off which you received from the NYPD advising you to attend the 21st February 1965 rally at the Audubon Ballroom and at which Malcolm X was assassinated. These disturbing reports raise a number of concerns.

At point 1:28 of this video a graphic appears of a February 1965 New York Herald Tribune article penned by you and in which you describe the NYPD’s arrest of two suspects in connection with the Malcolm X assassination – only to have the story later altered to reflect the arrest of only one suspect in the afternoon edition of the same paper, notwithstanding the fact that several eyewitnesses corroborated and confirmed the earlier version of the story.

Eyewitnesses have confirmed that the second suspect arrested by the NYPD that afternoon was none other than Clarence 2X Gill, a bodyguard of boxing champ Muhammad Ali and the captain of Louis Farrakhan’s mosque #11 in Boston. If these accounts prove true not only would they serve to confirm long-held suspicions that Louis Farrakhan was complicit in the Malcolm X assassination (since it is inconceivable that Farrakhan, who was lecturing at the Newark mosque to which most of the assassins were affiliated, could have been oblivious to the part played in the atrocity by the captain of his own mosque) but in view of these homicidal remarks by boxer Muhammad Ali about Malcolm X, it raises the disturbing possibility that Ali himself may have been privy to the murderous plans of his own bodyguard.

Furthermore, writer Toby Rogers has provided an account of a 2005 encounter he had with you and in which you were less-than-forthcoming when asked about the Malcolm X assassination.

In view of this, a number of questions beg for an answer:

  • Were you pressured to alter your story by the same NYPD who suggested that you attend the Malcolm X rally in the first place?
  • Who was your contact within the NYPD who suggested that you attend the Malcolm X rally and did they, in fact, advise you to sit “well back” (and out of harm’s way) from the stage?
  •  Since when did the NYPD become a public relations agency for Malcolm X and one whose business it was to recommend that journalists like yourself attend Malcolm’s rallies?
  • Why have you, a journalist, maintained a deafening silence about what was clearly suspicious behaviour by the NYPD and of a kind which strongly suggests they had prior knowledge of the plot to assassinate Malcolm X – suspicious behaviour which you, as a journalist, had (and have) a solemn moral and professional obligation to report?
  • And does your silence, Mr Breslin, constitute a form of journalistic complicity in the crime?

You are doubtless aware that an integral component of the FBI’s Counter-Intelligence Program (COINTELPRO) was the use of co-operative journalists, many of whom volunteered their services to the FBI and who made known their willingness to assist the Bureau in its counterintelligence operations.

Among the newspapers implicated in this practice were the New York Daily News (for which you presently write), Cleveland Plain Dealer, Philadelphia Inquir­er, Chicago Tribune and the Los Angeles Herald Examiner.

Are we to assume, Mr Breslin, that you are one of those journalists who aided and abetted the FBI in these activities?

And, to the extent that you were, have you not implicated yourself in the cover-up of the murder of Malcolm X?

We look forward to your reply.

Kind regards,

Paul Bitakaramire