The Wives of Farrakhan


11 Thus saith the Lord, Behold, I will raise up evil against thee out of thine own house, and I will take thy wives before thine eyes, and give them unto thy neighbour, and he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun.

12 For thou didst it secretly: but I will do this thing before ALL Israel, and before the sun…

2 Samuel 12:11-12

Contrary to what the title may suggest, this is not an article about the Nation of Islam’s (NOI) First Lady, Mrs Khadijah Farrakhan, or any of the other purported Muslim ‘wives’ of NOI leader Minister Louis Farrakhan such as ‘Sister Arifah’, ‘Sister Zinab’, ‘Sister Karen’, ‘Sister Tynnetta’ or any others.

Rather, this article concerns itself with those alleged violations of the NOI’s institutional legal code – the so-called Restrictive Law – arising from Mr Farrakhan’s extramarital affairs with female celebrities such as the actress-singer Lola Falana and (it’s been rumoured) the Tony award-winning singer Melba Moore. Concerning Ms Moore, there is a further allegation that Mr Farrakhan may have embezzled $50,000 in NOI funds to pay off debts owed by the soul diva during the 1980’s. The large sum of money involved has led to speculation that the payment may have been ‘hush money’ aimed at dissuading the artist from resolving her financial difficulties by selling a ‘kiss-and-tell’ story about her presumed romance with Mr Farrakhan to the news media. If true, this affair has all of the hallmarks of the NOI’s very own iteration of the 1994 NAACP scandal in which Benjamin Chavis, the group’s former Executive Director, was dismissed from his post over his misappropriation of $300,000 in the civil rights organisation’s funds in order to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit.

Each of the allegations contained herein derive from the writings and broadcasts of NOI dissident Lance Shabazz as well as from individuals associated with Mr Farrakhan’s elite ‘Executive Protection’ personal security detail (commonly known as the ‘E-Team’) and who have shared their revelations in a well-known NOI online forum.

A Principle of Fair Dealing


Over the years a number of troubling allegations have surfaced, both online and offline (culminating in the 2015 Lance Shabazz memoir Blood, Sweat & Tears as well as his July 2011 Moving On farewell YouTube webcast), to the effect that Mr Farrakhan may have carried on a series of extramarital affairs with women, both within and outside of the NOI, in flagrant violation of the 6th tenet of the Restrictive Law of the Nation of Islam (RL-NOI) – as recorded in the NOI publication The Supreme Wisdom – which strictly forbids fornication and adultery. In addition, Mr Farrakhan has long been suspected of participating in the 1965 assassination of Malcolm X – and then lying about it – in clear breach of the 20th, 22nd and 25th tenets of the RL-NOI.

This has raised grave concerns about the independence of the NOI’s judicial process, not the least of which is whether or not Mr Farrakhan, as leader of the organisation, is bound by the same laws that govern the conduct of the movement’s rank-and-file – and whether the NOI chief is acting in a just and lawful manner when he punishes his subordinates for the kinds of violations of which he is alleged to be far more guilty. It also raises fundamental questions as to whether or not, in the event that the NOI leader is found culpable for such violations, the movement has adequate procedures in place through which to establish a Special Tribunal and appoint a Special Counsel for the purpose of subjecting Mr Farrakhan to a Nixon-style IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDING aimed at holding him accountable for his suspected high crimes and misdemeanours.

Wives of the Messenger


In a disgraceful propaganda stunt staged during his 1993 Saviours Day convention in Chicago, Mr Farrakhan paraded what he referred to as “the wives of the Messenger” on stage by way of demonstrating the ‘dignity’ of Elijah Muhammad’s private life and in a bid to discredit Malcolm X. Many in the audience were deeply puzzled as to why Mr Farrakhan would place their Messenger’s ‘wives’ on ‘front street’ while continuing to conceal his own mistresses under a ‘bushel basket’ of secrecy (before grudgingly revealing their existence, a full ten years later, at a ‘Believers Only’ meeting in May of 2003).

Even more perplexing was Mr Farrakhan’s decision to parade Evelyn Williams (one of the purported ‘wives’ of Mr Muhammad) on stage when, as Mr Shabazz revealed in his aforementioned memoir, some of Mr Muhammad’s top officials (Captain Yusuf Shah, Secretary Maceo Hazziez and Assistant Minister Henry X of Harlem’s Mosque #7) had vilified both her and another ‘wife’, Lucille Rosary, as prostitutes in an August 1964 written tirade whose invective echoed a similar diatribe against them by Minister Isaiah Karriem of Baltimore’s Mosque #6 that appeared in that year’s September edition of the Muhammad Speaks newspaper – slurs that would have been suicidal without the express approval or assent of Mr Muhammad himself.

During the aforementioned Saviours Day rally, Mr Farrakhan paraded only four of these purported ‘wives’ in what many saw as a transparent bid to dupe his audience into believing that Mr Muhammad had remained within the ‘up to a maximum of four wives’ matrimonial confines prescribed in the Holy Qur’an when, in reality, ‘the Messenger’ had impregnated more than seven of his teenage secretaries in clear violation of both Islamic guidelines as well as the RL-NOI.

To worsen matters, several of Mr Muhammad’s female companions, upon becoming pregnant with his children, had been dragged before an NOI tribunal, charged with acts of adultery and fornication and excommunicated from the NOI by the very same Mr Muhammad who had seduced them and sired their offspring. And while some of the ladies who appeared at Mr Farrakhan’s rally attempted to defend Mr Muhammad and denounce Malcolm X, history recalls that these self-same ladies had filed paternity suits against Mr Muhammad following their expulsion from the NOI and charged him with the dereliction of his parental duties.

As for Mr Farrakhan himself, 1964 saw him pen a series of vicious and defamatory Muhammad Speaks editorials (with titles like ‘Fall of a Minister’ and ‘Boston Minister tells of Malcolm – Muhammad’s Chief Hypocrite’) in which he denounced Malcolm X as a lying and slandering ‘traitor’ – only to appear on the Saviours Day stage, 29 years later, with the very ‘wives of the Messenger’ whose existence he had previously sought to deny.

Since no marriage certificates or comparable legal documents have ever surfaced to authenticate the matrimony of these ‘wives’ (and since Mr Muhammad himself never publicly acknowledged any such relationship with his former secretaries) Mr Farrakhan’s claims regarding these ladies have long been fiercely disputed by die-hard devotees of Mr Muhammad who acknowledge only one woman – the late Clara Muhammad – as the sole authentic spouse of their Messenger. Indeed, much of the long-standing dissent against Mr Farrakhan within the wider NOI movement stems from what hard-line devotees of Mr Muhammad view as Mr Farrakhan’s fabrications, ‘deviations’ and ‘hypocrisy’ as it relates to their Messenger’s life and works.

As far as his own Muslim ‘wives’ are concerned, Mr Farrakhan’s alleged ‘marriage’ to the late Tynnetta Muhammad has long posed something of a theological – and existential – conundrum. Since embarking on the rebuilding of the NOI, Mr Farrakhan has steadfastly maintained that Elijah Muhammad (who officially passed away in 1975) is, in fact, still “physically alive.” And since ‘Mother Tynnetta’ was one of the ladies whom Mr Farrakhan presented to the world as a “wife of the Messenger” (during his 1993 Saviours Day convention) this would suggest that Mr Farrakhan may have engaged in adulterous sexual relations with the spouse of a man who, as Mr Farrakhan would have it, was still ‘living’ – one of the gravest sins imaginable and a stoning offence in the version of Sunni Islam to which Mr Farrakhan adheres.

Blood of Shabazz


Mr Farrakhan and other former officials of Elijah Muhammad’s NOI have long maintained that, following the 1964 expulsion of Malcolm X from the movement, their Messenger explicitly instructed his remaining followers to “leave Malcolm alone” and in no way cause any harm to come to him or his family. And yet, as the evidence clearly shows, these officials boldly disobeyed their Messenger. By so doing, they violated the 22nd and 25th tenets of the RL-NOI which strictly prohibit acts of violence against and/or the killing of a fellow Muslim and exposed their Messenger to decades-long accusations that he personally ordered or otherwise approved of Malcolm’s assassination.

In writing editorials in the Muhammad Speaks newspaper and issuing public denunciations of Malcolm X as a ‘hypocrite’ – in apparent defiance of Mr Muhammad’s clear instructions – Mr Farrakhan has all but confessed to disobeying his Messenger and violating key tenets of the RL-NOI. As such, he must be fully held to account by the NOI itself. Members of the organization who may possess evidence of Mr Farrakhan’s wrongdoing have a solemn duty to share that information with an NOI-appointed Special Tribunal and Special Counsel. Such cooperation would not constitute ‘treason’ or ‘hypocrisy’ since the parties to whom this information would be divulged would be ones appointed not by ‘the white man’ but by the NOI itself.

Furthermore, since Mr Farrakhan has long justified his own decision to report Malcolm X to Mr Muhammad for sharing details of their Messenger’s private life with himself and other NOI officials, Mr Farrakhan could hardly object to the reporting of his own violations of the RL-NOI by whosoever may have evidence of such. To the contrary, Mr Farrakhan should actively encourage it since the 13th tenet of the RL-NOI requires all Believers to “report all slackness, weakness and wrongdoing.” And it would appear from the foregoing accounts that Mr Farrakhan, who penned a manuscript titled The Restrictive Law of Islam is Our Success, may be guilty of repeatedly and flagrantly violating the very laws about which he wrote with such lengthy and self-righteous erudition.

The assassination of Malcolm X, in which Mr Farrakhan has long been suspected of having participated, was the direct result of the NOI’s systematic violation and disregard of its own legal procedures. Malcolm, who had been the target of a vicious whispering campaign accusing him of slandering the Messenger, was denied due process and a fair hearing before his accusers by a guilt-ridden leader who abused his authority – and Malcolm’s brutal 1965 assassination was the direct result. That tragic history cannot be permitted to repeat itself. For that reason, the NOI must demonstrate to the world that it has matured into an institution whose leader is bound by the same laws that he enforces on his subordinates and whose judiciary is fully independent of his whim. And the only way in which this can be convincingly demonstrated is by putting Mr Farrakhan on trial and punishing him for his own reported violations of NOI law.

The E-Team


If the reported accounts are true, Mr Farrakhan has repeatedly and flagrantly violated the RL-NOI and has done so in the presence of members of his elite personal security detail, the aforementioned ‘E-Team’. These individuals should be subpoenaed to testify before the NOI’s own Special Tribunal. And in the event of a guilty finding, Mr Farrakhan should be impeached and removed from the office he holds as leader of the NOI. The NOI’s Special Tribunal and Special Counsel must both be fully independent of Mr Farrakhan and his Council of Labourers since some of its members may be implicated in the wrongdoing of which Mr Farrakhan himself stands accused. Most importantly, the NOI’s Special Counsel must be a truly independent individual – ideally a former and well-respected member of the NOI who is untainted by any ties of loyalty or patronage to Mr Farrakhan or his associates. Any failure to provide these assurances would send the unmistakable message that Mr Farrakhan and those whom he favours are above the very same laws which they enforce upon others.

[Case Scenario: Agurs Linward X Cathcart (aka Abdul Karriem Muhammad), a close associate of Mr Farrakhan and an individual whom many suspect of having played a critical role in the 1965 assassination of Malcolm X, has been repeatedly ‘brought up on charges’ and ‘sat down’ over the years by Mr Farrakhan himself for his various violations of the RL-NOI. Were Mr Cathcart to agree to cooperate with the NOI’s Special Tribunal and testify against Mr Farrakhan in its investigation of the role played by the NOI leader in the murder of Malcolm X, then Mr Cathcart should be offered the prospect of a full pardon by the Special Tribunal in return for his full cooperation. And since Mr Cathcart would be assisting the NOI’s own judiciary (and not ‘the white man’s courts’) he would be immune to accusations of ‘treason’ and ‘hypocrisy’ by those who might level such charges. To the contrary, his assistance in bringing to justice those in its leadership who may have violated the RL-NOI (and thus exposed the organisation to discredit, disrespect and disrepute before the entire world) would distinguish him as one of the greatest patriots in the movement’s history.]

If found guilty of these offences, Mr Farrakhan should be stripped of all of the privileges and prerogatives he enjoys as NOI leader, expelled from the NOI for a minimum of five years, banned from all media appearances or any other acts of publicity, subjected to a severe financial penalty, required to vacate the NOI’s 4855 South Woodlawn Avenue ‘National House’ in Chicago (as well as its 2118 East Violet Drive hacienda in Phoenix, Arizona) and, upon his return to the fold, he should do so as an entry-level Fruit of Islam (FOI) soldier selling copies of the Final Call newspaper on Chicago’s streets.

Falana Follies


In addition to his long-rumoured romance with singer-actress Lola Falana, one of the graver allegations levelled against Mr Farrakhan by Mr Shabazz in his Moving On webcast relates to the possible embezzlement of $50,000 in NOI funds to pay off debts owed by the Tony award-winning singer Melba Moore. Since this payment was made around the time Mr Farrakhan was issuing public appeals for funds with which to purchase Mosque Maryam and other former NOI properties this transaction raises grave concerns about financial irregularities and possible fraud carried out by Mr Farrakhan.

One question that some have raised is whether or not any of the Melba Moore funds were misappropriated from the $5-million loan which the NOI had received in 1985 from the Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi and which Mr Farrakhan had publicly proclaimed was earmarked for ‘economic development’ under the People Organized and Working for Economic Rebirth (POWER) program. If true, such an alleged diversion of funds may amount to a theft from the NOI treasury and a defrauding of the Libyan people by Mr Farrakhan. Furthermore, in view of reports that Mr Gaddafi may have been seeking the full repayment of the POWER loan, it would appear that the Libyan leader’s 2011 overthrow and gruesome execution were developments which Mr Farrakhan – for all the public fury he vented and sorrow he feigned – privately welcomed since the Obama administration had inadvertently helped to eliminate Mr Farrakhan’s single biggest creditor.

In view of these activities one is left to conclude that Mr Farrakhan bears significant responsibility for the NOI’s culture of corruption which saw a number of his top lieutenants, most notably his international representative Akbar Muhammad, criminally indicted on various fraud charges between 1980 and 2009. After all, there must have been something of a permissive environment within the NOI which tempted these senior officials to even contemplate such chicanery without fear of the consequences and the only individual who could have fostered such a climate is Mr Farrakhan himself. Put another way, these NOI officials, in the financial misdeeds in which they engaged, would appear to have been following Mr Farrakhan’s lead.

The Lockhart Affair


In his Moving On webcast, Mr Shabazz has also alluded to wild celebrity parties that were held by the late actor Calvin Lockhart and that were attended by Mr Farrakhan and during which the NOI leader engaged in activities which, in the words of Mr Shabazz, “would shock you.” Whether or not any of these alleged activities involved misconduct that contravened the RL-NOI remains to be determined but Mr Shabazz’s imputations are especially disquieting since he makes them as someone in a position to know or who otherwise has access to individuals who possess first-hand knowledge of the implied indiscretions.

If President William Jefferson Clinton of the United States of America could face impeachment proceedings in 1999 arising from the improprieties in which he engaged with a single mistress, the intern Monica Lewinsky – and then lying about it to the American people – few would dispute that Mr Farrakhan, whose own violations of the RL-NOI resulting from the far graver misconduct in which he has reportedly engaged with multiple mistresses, is any less deserving of the same judicial censure.

When one considers that even a figure as seemingly all-powerful as the Supreme Leader of Iran is yet accountable to a deliberative body of theologians known as the ‘Assembly of Experts’ – and who are charged with electing and removing the Ayatollah and supervising his activities – one is left to wonder as to why a similar entity has never been established within the NOI and to which its own leader is just as answerable. The time is long past due for the NOI to fully enforce its own laws and to bring Mr Farrakhan to justice for his reported violations of those laws. And if Mr Farrakhan is found guilty he should be punished with the same severity as that which he reserved for those of his subordinates found to have engaged in similar transgressions. Especially since he would appear to be amongst his own movement’s very worst offenders.

Tragedy at Mosque Maryam


Back in April of 1993, Mr Farrakhan delivered one of his most talked-about sermons of that period and one that sparked significant controversy over its supposedly ‘homophobic’ themes. Entitled ‘The Problem of Suicide and the Causes of Homosexuality’ the speech was noteworthy not so much for its content as for the listeners at whom it was aimed. Its primary constituency was (ostensibly) the African-American community at large but it had a second, and far more important, audience that was much closer to home. Part-sermon and part-eulogy, Mr Farrakhan spoke about the recent suicide of a member of the Mosque Maryam FOI who had taken his own life for reasons which, at the time, were known to only a very few within the NOI.

For during the previous eighteen months, Mr Farrakhan had been wrestling with one of the most shocking scandals to have ever hit the NOI and one that may even stand apart as unique in all Islamic history. In the movement’s own replay of the Nazi-era ‘Ernst Röhm Affair’ it had emerged that a group of FOI soldiers (known as the ‘Task Force’), and who were affiliated with Mr Farrakhan’s flagship mosque in Chicago, had been engaged in homosexual activities right under Mr Farrakhan’s nose and that one of them had taken his own life after a jilted lover had threatened to reveal their gay relationship to the former’s (female) fiancé. And while the identities of the persons involved will remain confidential this scandal would appear to represent perhaps the only known instance in the history of Islam where a cabal of homosexuals was actively operating within a mosque. The Gestapo-like efficiency with which this sordid affair was later covered-up by Mr Farrakhan and his minions is both a testament to the Kafkaesque paranoia which permeates his organisation and the moral rot that is slowly devouring it from within.

The Supreme Wisdom


During a 1991 Chicago sermon entitled ‘The Black Man Must Do for Self or Suffer the Consequences’ Mr Farrakhan declared that if he ever “sold out the mission of the rise of black people” he granted the FOI permission to execute him. When one considers that Mr Farrakhan, who has been the leader of the NOI for a staggering thirty-eight years and during which time he appears to have expended more energy on mastering the three movements of Mendelssohn’s violin concerto than he has on delivering on the NOI’s long sought-after goal of independent statehood (as called for in his organisation’s manifesto known as ‘The Muslim Program’), few would dispute that the NOI leader now fully warrants the penalty which he prescribed for himself as a result of his treasonable dereliction of duty and criminal abdication of his leadership responsibilities.

Mr Farrakhan, who showed little mercy in humiliating and expelling Khalid Abdul Muhammad from the NOI following the latter’s infamous 1993 Kean College address, now stands accused of far graver violations than anything of which his former National Spokesman was ever suspected. And having publicly called for the murder of Malcolm X on the grounds that Malcolm was a ‘traitor’, the time has come to evaluate Mr Farrakhan’s own record as NOI leader according to his own unforgiving criteria and to determine what punishment should be forthcoming should he be found wanting.

Having previously called for the criminal prosecution of former US President George W Bush and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair for the roles they each played in the unlawful 2003 invasion of Iraq – arguing that their respective positions as heads of state should afford neither man immunity from accountability – the same principle should now apply to Mr Farrakhan himself where his own reported violations of the RL-NOI are concerned. Mr Farrakhan should be called to account for his wrongdoing and the NOI, whose institutional credibility is now at stake, has a solemn obligation to demonstrate to the world that its system of justice is truly blind and is one that makes no distinction between the leadership and the rank-and-file where the enforcement of the Restrictive Law is concerned.

Mr Farrakhan’s reported violations are all matters which the NOI’s proposed Special Tribunal and Special Counsel must fully investigate and its accused leader has a moral duty to foot the bill of any inquest out of the financial resources of his own personal estate. The time has come for the NOI to fully enforce its own Restrictive Law as it relates to the reported violations of that law by Mr Farrakhan himself. The movement must move swiftly to deal with Mr Farrakhan in the way in which a nation deals with such a delinquent and if found guilty of the most serious violation – murder – then such a man as Mr Farrakhan will have shown himself to be ‘worthy’ of the same penalty of which he once deemed Malcolm X.

By taking these actions, the NOI will have demonstrated to the world that it has attained a level of institutional maturity wherein it can be trusted to investigate, put on trial and punish the wrongdoing of not only the ‘little believers’ amongst the organisation’s rank-and-file but those impeachable high crimes and misdemeanours perpetrated by the self-anointed ‘Big Believer’ himself: Minister Louis Farrakhan.


14 thoughts on “The Wives of Farrakhan

    Special to the New York Times
    Published: November 3, 1987

    CHICAGO, Nov. 2— Nineteen children of Elijah Muhammad, the late Black Muslim leader, have squared off against the world’s largest bank in a legal dispute with a $5.7 million bank account at stake.

    The battle, in which the bank, Dai Ichi Kangyo of Japan, is allied with Mr. Muhammad’s two other children, is yet another chapter in a larger and extremely bitter fight over his multimillion-dollar estate that has divided his family ever since he died without a will in 1975.

    On one side of the split family are Herbert Muhammad and his brother Wallace, who inherited from their father the leadership of the Nation of Islam, now known as the Muslim Community of America. In a series of legal skirmishes dating from the late 1970’s, 19 legitimate and illegitimate children of Elijah Muhammad have contended that Herbert and Wallace kept property that should have gone to all the heirs from being listed in the inventory of the estate. The Brothers’ Position

    The two brothers have responded by contending that their father kept his personal property separate from that of the Nation of Islam. But the rival side of the family has won a number of judgments against them, and last March the Muslim Community of America filed for reorganization in Federal Bankruptcy Court here, hoping to save several pieces of the organization’s property, including its South Side mosque, from creditors – primarily the 19 Muhammad children.

    Among the judgments that have favored the 19 was one issued by the probate division of Cook County Circuit Court, which ordered that the $5.7 million bank account – $3.3 million in principal at the time of Elijah Muhammad’s death, $2.4 million in interest since then – be turned over to the children.

    The Muslim Community of America wants that judgment to be reversed by the court’s appellate division, where an appeal was recently filed by Dai Ichi Kangyo. The bank had already turned the account over to the Muslim Community when the judgment was issued to the heirs, and it has hired one of Chicago’s largest law firms, Jenner & Block, to argue that the account, which was built by donations from largely low-income Black Muslims, properly belongs to the religious community. State Supports Bank

    The office of the Illinois Attorney General, Neil Hartigan, which represents the interest of state charities, has filed a third-party petition supporting the bank’s position.

    The hearing on the case is not expected until early next year.

    Representing the family is Rufus Cook, a Chicago lawyer who has spent the better part of a decade suing the Muslim Community on behalf of the 19 children. In a separate suit, Mr. Cook has already won a $13 million judgment against the organization for selling off real estate holdings that, a court determined, belonged to the family.

    ”They simply have never taken into consideration the interests of the illegitimate children,” Mr. Cook said of Herbert and Wallace Muhammad.

    Of the larger struggle, Herbert Muhammad, perhaps best known as a manager of the former heavyweight champion Muhammad Ali, said: ”It is a long-term fight, where none of us will win. It’s all being eaten up by legal fees.”


    Court Gives Leader’s Money to Black Muslims
    Published: January 2, 1988

    CHICAGO, Jan. 1— A $5.7 million bank account of Elijah Muhammad, the Black Muslim leader who died in 1975, belongs to the religious organization he founded and not to his heirs, an Illinois appeals court has decided.

    ”Where funds are solicited to benefit a religious organization, we believe that basic principles of equity and fair dealing should preclude the use of those funds to benefit the personal estate of the religious leader,” Justice Mel Jiganti of the State Appellate Court wrote in the court’s opinion.

    The bank account at the Chicago Branch of the Dai-Ichi Kangyo Bank, formerly the First Pacific Bank of Chicago, totalled $3.3 million shortly after Mr. Muhammad’s death and because of accrued interest has increased to $5.7 million.

    The dispute over the funds has been in the courts since Mr. Muhammad’s death and has pitted two of his sons against each other. Arguments of 2 Sides

    Emmanuel Muhammad, administrator of his father’s estate, argued that the money belonged to Elijah Muhammad’s 22 children.

    Warith Deen Muhammad, the eldest son, who is the new leader of the religious group, now calling itself the American Muslim Mission, maintained that the money belonged to the organization.

    After Elijah Muhammad’s death, the bank turned over the $3.3 million account to the Black Muslim movement, which was then headed by Warith Deen Muhammad and called itself the Nation of Islam.

    But in 1982 Judge Henry Budzinski of Cook County Court ruled that the money had been given to Elijah Muhammad for his personal use and should be turned over to his children with the interest accrued.

    After an appeal, Judge Budzinski again ruled in favor of the children in July 1986. The appellate court overturned that ruling on Thursday. #21 Days to Appeal The heirs have two weeks to ask the appellate court for a rehearing and 21 days to appeal to the Illinois Supreme Court.

    Elijah Muhammad was born Elijah Poole, the son of a Georgia sharecropper. He moved to Detroit in the 1920’s, where he met Wali Farad, founder of the movement there. He changed his name, became leader of the movement and moved its headquarters to Chicago in 1934.

    He called himself a prophet and lived like a king in a fortress-like building on the South Side.

    When he died at the age of 77, the group had 100,000 members and Mr. Muhammad had amassed a fortune of as much as $20 million, much of it collected in small sums from followers.

    Photo of Elijah Muhammad (The New York Times, 1964)

    AUG. 18, 1964

    Elijah Muhammad, the leader yesterday that he had no knowledge that his son, Akbar, had broken with him.

    The 67‐year‐old leader was questioned by telephone in Chi­cago about United Press Inter­national reports that Akbar, a 25‐year‐old student at Alhazar University in Cairo, has followed another son, Wallace, and repudiated his father.

    Last month, Wallace Muhammad withdrew from the Muslim movement, alleging that his father was guilty of immorality and religious deception and that his movement was politically ineffective.

    This break stemmed from charges in Los Angeles that Mr. Muhammad had fathered children of (9)? two young secretaries who once worked with him.

    The reports from Cairo say that Akbar wrote to his father asking for an explanation of ‐he charges and that he decided on the break when he received no answer.

    Yesterday his father said that he had received his son’s letter and that he would answer it shortly.

    “Other messengers, like Moses and King David, have had trou­ble with their sons,” he added.

    This article can be viewed in its original form. Please send questions and feedback to

    Man in the News
    JUNE 29, 1964

    ONE night a year after the start of the Great De­pression, an out‐of‐work sharecropper’s son named
    Eli­jah Poole turned up for a secret meeting in a musty basement in Detroit. He had gone to hear an ex‐convict itinerant silk merchant turned prophet, who went under the

    Telling strange tales of Af­rica and Allah and the evil ways of the blue‐eyed white man, he had attracted a few followers from the disadvan­taged Negro community. They became known as the Temple of Islam.

    As Elijah Poole tells the story of that night in 1930, he recognized instantly that Fard was “the second return of the son as prophesied.” He became Fard’s lieutenant in the burgeoning movement.

    In 1934 W. D. Fard disap­peared and has not been heard of since. Yesterday, Elijah Poole, now 67 years old and known as Elijah Mu­hammad, the Messenger of the Temple of Islam, was greeted by a roaring crowd of 6,500 at the 369th Regi­ment Armory in Harlem.

    At Center of Rebellion

    Elijah Muhammad’s move­ment, the Black Muslims, has come to be the center of what is sometimes called the Black Man’s rebellion in mid‐cen­tury America. Existing along­side civil rights organizations calling for integration, his iron‐disciplined legions pray for total separation from the “white devils” that have kept them down for so long.

    His followers, who dress in neat, dark business suits or white floor‐length gowns and veils, have established mos­ques, schools and their own businesses in the major cities. Their number has never been officially announced; claims run from 50,000 to 250,000.

    An elite corps of black Puritans, they renounce alco­hol, drugs, tobacco, gambling and sexual immorality. They are enjoined never to carry weapons, not even nail files, and always to be polite and pay their bills. Cleanli­ness in dress and housing is heavily stressed.

    They eat one meal a day—never including pork — and face east five times a day to pray to Allah.

    A Status of Divinity

    To them, the frail, delicate­boned Elijah Muhammad has the status of divinity. His words are at the center of their belief; his picture is on their walls.

    When his thin, high voice intones the traditional begin­ning to his speeches a wave of excitement passes through their ranks.

    “As ‐ Salaam ‐ Alaikum (Peace Be Unto You),” he be­gins. “In the name of Allah, the most Merciful God, to whom all holy praises are due, the Lord of all the worlds; the most Merciful Father and life‐giver to the lost‐found, mentally dead so­called Negroes here in the Wilderness of North Amer­ica.”

    In the life of Elijah Muham­mad, as in the obscure back­ground of his movement, myth and fact are inter­twined. It abounds in myste­rious strangers, prophetic voices and conflicting stories. All of this, apparently, he does not discourage.

    Elijah Poole was born in Sandersville, Ga., on Oct. 7, 1897. His father, Wali Poole, was a Baptist preacher who scratched out a living for his 13 children by farming a white man’s land.

    At the age of 16, having completed the fourth grade, he left home and took a suc­cession of temporary jobs. At 22 he married the former Clara Evans, and in 1923 they moved with their two children to Detroit.

    He was bitter when he left Georgia, and his bitterness grew as jobs became scarce in the North. “I saw enough of the white man’s brutality in Georgia to last me for 26,000 years,” he once said. His meeting with W. D. Fard was a fateful one. Fard, he said, “took me out of the gutters in the streets of De‐

    With Fard’s disappearance in 1934 Elijah Muhammad as­sumed leadership of the move­ment, which by then had grown to 8,000.

    His succession was disputed by others in Detroit and he moved the organization to Chicago, where the Temples of Islam multiplied.

    Elijah was in jail for draft­dodging from 1942 to 1946, but he directed the movement from prison and took up the reins again when he was re­leased.

    The movement has mush­roomed in the last six years. Its principal teaching — the establishment of a separate nation for Negroes—is widely discussed and its newspaper, “Muhammad Speaks,” widely read.

    Asthma and bronchitis have compelled Elijah to move to Phoenix, where he lives in a small, two‐bedroom house with a staff of three. His public appearances are rare.

    This article can be viewed in its original form. Please send questions and feedback to

    ARCHIVES | 1964

    M. S. HANDLERMARCH 9, 1964
    Malcolm X broke last night with Elijah Muhammad’s Chi­cago‐based Black Muslim move­ment and announced that he was organizing a politically ori­ented “black nationalist party.”

    He said the party would seek to convert the Negro popula­tion from nonviolence to active self‐defense against white su­premacists in all parts of the country.

    “I remain a Muslim,” Malcolm said, “but the main emphasis of the new movement will be black nationalism as a political con­cept and form of social action against the oppressors.”

    “I have reached the conclu­sion,” he said, “that I can best spread Mr. Muhammad’s mes­sage by staying out of the Na­tion of Islam and continuing to work on my own among Amer­ica’s 22 million non‐Muslim Ne­groes.”

    Had Been Suspended

    Malcolm has under sus­pension by Mr. Muhammad as the New York leader of the separatist Black Muslim move­ment.

    He asserted last night that the movement had “gone as far as it can” because it was too narrowly sectarian and too in­hibited.

    “I am prepared,” Malcolm said, “to cooperate in local civil rights actions in the South and elsewhere and shall do so be­cause every campaign for spe­cific objectives can only height­en the political consciousness of the Negroes and intensify their identification against white so­ciety.”

    Malcolm said he had accepted

    “There is no use deceiving ourselves,” Malcolm said. “Good education; housing and jobs are imperatives for the Negroes, and I shall support them in their fight to win these objec­tives, but I shall tell the Ne­groes that while these are nec­essary, they cannot solve the main Negro problem.”

    Malcolm continued:

    “I shall also tell them that what has been called the ‘Negro revolution’ in the United States is a deception practiced upon them, because they have only to examine the failure of this so‐called revolution to produce any positive results in the past year.

    “I shall tell them what a real revolution means—the French Revolution, the American Revo­lution, Algeria, to name a few. There can be no revolution without bloodshed, and it is nonsense to describe the civil rights movement in America as a revolution.”

    Malcolm said Elijah Muham­mad had prevented him from participating in civil rights struggles in the South al­though he had had many op­portunities to do so.

    “It is going to be different now,” Malcolm said. “I’m going to join in the fight wherever Negroes ask for my help, and I suspect my activities will be on a greater and more inten­sive scale than in the past.”

    Would Speak at College

    “I shall also accept all im­portant speaking engagments at colleges and universities,” Malcolm said, “because I find that most white students are more attuned to the times than their parents and realize that something is fundamentally wrong in this country.”

    Malcolm has spoken at more than 20 colleges and universi­ties, including Harvard and Yale. He said his popularity as a university speaker had aroused the animus and jeal­ousy of Elijah Muhammad’s family.

    “Envy,” Malcolm said, “blinds men and makes it impossible for them to think clearly. This is what happened.”

    Malcolm’s speech at Manhat­tan Center after President Ken­nedy’s death was only the ex­cuse for his suspension, Malcolm said. In that speech Malcolm declared that Mr. Kennedy’s assassination was a case of the “chickens coming home to roost.”

    Malcolm contended that his phrase had been misinterpreted. He said he had meant that a spread of social hatred had cre­ated an atmosphere that made assassination possible.

    Malcolm said he had not been invited to the annual Black Muslim convention in Chicago on Feb. 26. Later, he said, he telephoned Elijah Muhammad and requested clarification of his status.

    He received a letter from Mr. Muhammad that left the ques­tion unanswered, he said.

    Malcolm said he decided then that the time had come for him to act, but that he would not set himself up as a rival to Mr. Muhammad or provoke him.

    Plans New York Base

    Malcolm declared that his first task would be to construct an organization based in New York. He said that he was sup­ported by many Negro intellec­tuals and professionals who could not accept Islam but ac­cepted the Black Muslim view of race relations in the United States.

    Malcolm contended that Ne­groes were dissatisfied with the progress of the civil rights move­ment and that this had created the basis for a successful black nationalist political movement. He declared:

    “The white power structure is hopeful that the civil rights leaders will channel the demands and the bitterness of the Ne­groes into a token painless com­promise. They are mistaken. The white leaders don’t realize the extent to which the civil rights leaders have deceived them about the true feelings of the Negroes.

    “Another thing. The Negroes still don’t understand the power of the ballot in the North. We must make them understand that the Negro voters have it in their power to decide next November whether Johnson stays in the White House or goes back to his Texas cotton patch.”

    Malcolm said he was not try­ing to split the Muslims.

    “I want it clearly understood that my advice to all Muslims is that they stay in the Nation of Islam under the spiritual guidance of the Honorable Elijah Muhammad. It is not my desire to encourage any of them to follow me,” he said.

    Muslim Leaders Involved in Split

    This article can be viewed in its original form. Please send questions and feedback to

    Published: July 15, 1981

    THE writing of historical drama is a risky business, especially when the history is as fresh as yesterday’s headlines. The specter of famous real-life characters can frighten well-meaning playwrights into contriving preachy message plays or sanctimonious pageants or bland docu-dramas about stick figures. But Laurence Holder, the author of two one-act plays at the Henry Street Settlement’s New Federal Theater, doesn’t frighten easily. In the second of his works, ”When the Chickens Came Home to Roost,” he has taken a pair of intimidating, legendary men – Elijah Muhammad and Malcolm X – and brought them to utterly convincing life.

    The play is set in Muhammad’s office, the headquarters of the Black Muslim movement, in the early 1960’s. Mr. Holder wishes to limn the disintegration of one of the most important relationships in black American history. At the time we meet his heroes, the seeds of their eventual split have been sown. Muhammad has been served with paternity suits by two former secretaries; the incredulous Malcolm possesses evidence that supports the charges. But if Malcolm has every reason to feel betrayed by the mentor who once saved his life, he still feels a measure of loyalty. ”I love you like a father,” he tells Muhammad, and we never doubt that he does.

    Still, there’s no going back. Over the course of two scenes, we watch the men rake over their fabled past and finally uproot it. As we do, Mr. Holder creates a fascinating tug-of-war between men who once had everything in common – who indeed made history together – and who now find themselves antagonistic strangers. What’s more, the playwright dramatizes the growing breach with a lot more humor and a lot less hand-wringing than one might expect.

    The two characters form a highly theatrical study in contrasts – of youth and age, of idealism and cynicism, of energy and exhaustion. Muhammad is a cagey operator near the end of his life, trying to maintain his separatist organization in the era of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. As played by the pixieish Kirk Kirksey, he paces his office with a floorwalker’s tilted posture and pursed lips; his kindly, grandfatherly looks do not disguise his formidable sangfroid and paranoia. Attempting to flatter and charm his ”main man” back into the fold, he keeps losing control of his temper. ”This ain’t no democracy -it’s the Nation of Allah,” Muhammad snaps when Malcolm gingerly questions him. The revealing outburst concluded, Allah’s messenger retreats behind a politician’s disingenuous grin.

    Malcolm is everything Muhammad is not: a cool, rational ascetic who’s incapable of dishonesty. He looks for ways to excuse his leader’s transgressions, and, failing to find them, realizes that he aust sadly accept the fact that ”a man is just a man.” Only once, and then only for a span of five words, does Malcolm raise his voice. To the end, he tries to appeal to Muhammad in a respectful, generous way with the hope of preserving their joint cause. It’s much to the credit of Denzel Washington’s firm, likeable performance that this Malcolm is honorable and altruistic without ever becoming a plaster saint.

    Allie Woods has directed the play with unerring shrewdness. Like the writing, the staging is taut and intimate: Even if its characters were not famous, ”Chickens” would still work as a suspenseful game of cat-and-mouse. The evening’s opening effort, a one-character play titled ”Zora,” has also been well directed, by Elizabeth Van Dyke, and is performed for all it is worth by a fiery young actress, Phylicia Ayers-Allen. Unfortunately, ”Zora” is not as fully realized as the second half of Mr. Holder’s bill.

    The subject is again worthwhile. Mr. Holder’s heroine, the novelist and folklorist Zora Neale Hurston, underwent almost as many changes as Malcolm X. Born in Eatonville, Fla., at the turn of the century, she arrived in New York on a Barnard scholarship in anthropology in 1925. She became a key figure in the Harlem Renaissance, only to fall out later on with such associates as Langston Hughes and Richard Wright. Though an independent-minded black nationalist to the end, she embraced conservative Republicanism late in life before dying in poverty and obscurity in 1960.

    Mr. Holder has tried to compress this extremely complex story into one tearful, autobiographical monologue that Hurston delivers in a bus station in 1949, shortly after she was slapped with a trumped-up morals charge. If the playwright captures his heroine’s flamboyance and unearned suffering, he’s finally defeated by the sheer quantity of information he must convey in shorthand. But Mr. Holder does convince us that there’s a far bigger play in ”Zora” – and, once we see its companion piece, he leaves us equally convinced that he’s just the man to write it. As It Might Have Been ZORA and WHEN THE CHICKENS CAME HOME TO ROOST, two one-act plays by Laurence Holder; costumes, Judy Dearing; sets, Robert Ed- monds; lights, Allen Lee Hughes; production stage manager, Gwendolyn M. Gilliam. Pre- sented by the Henry Street Settlement’s New Federal Theater, Woodie King Jr. and Steve Tennen, producers. At 466 Grand Street. ZORA, directed by Elizabeth Van Dyke Zora Neale Hurston ……………Phylicia Ayers-Allen and WHEN THE CHICKENS CAME HOME TO ROOST, directed by Allie Woods Elijah Muhammad ……………………..Kirk Kirksey Malcolm Shabazz …………………Denzel Washington

  2. Yo Bro,

    The actual COURT PAPERS should be sought and published!
    The COURT CASE exposes the LIES OF POOLE & WALCOTT and proves that the BASTARD children were being ignored by WALLACE MUHAMMAD & HIS BROTHER. It was the solicitor who fought their case & won.

    ” Representing the family is Rufus Cook, a Chicago lawyer who has spent the better part of a decade suing the Muslim Community on behalf of the 19 children. In a separate suit, Mr. Cook has already won a $13 million judgment against the organization for selling off real estate holdings that, a court determined, belonged to the family.

    ”They simply have never taken into consideration the interests of the illegitimate children,” Mr. Cook said of Herbert and Wallace Muhammad.

    Of the larger struggle, Herbert Muhammad, perhaps best known as a manager of the former heavyweight champion Muhammad Ali, said: ”It is a long-term fight, where none of us will win. It’s all being eaten up by legal fees.”


    Modern Day Slavers – “Their God Granted Right?!”.

    ISRAEL – NOT SO COOL FACTS: Every American Should Know

    Israel Hebrew website says that the total annual profits garnered from white slavery in Israel have reached the US $1 Billion Dollar mark. (2005)

    10,000 Eastern European and Russian girls are lured to Israel each year and enslaved as prostitutes.

    Over the past decade, about 100,000 women have been trafficked into Israel in what Keidar calls “modern slavery”.

    Leviticus 25:44-46 (New American Standard Bible)
    44 – As for your male and female slaves whom you may have—you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you.
    46 – You may even bequeath them to your sons after you, to receive as a possession; you can use them as permanent slaves. But in respect to your countrymen, the sons of Israel, you shall not rule with severity over one another.

    Slavery is Legal to the Jewish People. A right granted to them by GOD!
    And they take their Religion very seriously!

    IF you Google: WORLD WHITE SLAVE TRADE CENTERED IN ISRAEL = About 13,600,000 results
    IF you Google: Jews and the white slave trade = About 7,030,000 results
    IF you Google: Jews and the black slave trade = About 9,100,000 results
    These people are Professional Slavers, and they have been doing it a long time. And it doesn’t matter if you are black or white.
    They are Equal Opportunity Slavers 🙂
    The only reason you don’t know about it, is because they control all mass media.
    Time to wake up.


    White slave trade now earns US$1 billion annually in Israel.
    A REPORT carried by the “News Israel” Hebrew website on the Internet on Wednesday, March 23, 2005 says that the total annual profits garnered from white slavery in Israel have reached the US$1 billion mark.
    The website reported that the white slave trade has become a real industry in Israel.
    The website noted that the figures on the industry were given today to the Speaker of the Knesset Ruby Rivlin by deputy Zahafa Galoun of the Parliamentary Investigations Committee.

    The website reported that compiling the report took a period of four years during which the conditions of the white slave trade in Israel were observed. It became evident that the number of prostitutes who arrived in Israel rose from 3,000 to 5,000 women. The price of a woman in the prostitute market is between $8,000 and $10,000.
    According to the report, the prostitute works from 14 to 18 hours each week but receives only 20 shekels of the 120 shekels paid to the “owner of the lady.” The report said that although there had been minor improvement in the fight against the white slave trade, and in spite of the massive efforts that the police and Zionist courts have made, the mafia running the trade continues to do so on a large scale and effectively.
    The report urged Zionist courts to pass rulings that are more powerful and severe against the traffickers in white slaves, stiffening penalties for the masters and bosses in the trade.

    This suggestion is exactly the same one offered by the latest report from the US State Department on the condition of women in the Zionist entity. That report said that tougher laws needed to be enacted after Israel had become the biggest center for the export of prostitutes in the world.

    It is worthy of mention that the Zionist police force grants official and legal work permits to many brothels in Israel. It has become known that top officials in the Zionist police agencies own many of them.

    Eric Mueller writes:

    The Arabic press watches what comes out of Israel in Hebrew as well as English.
    Although the Zionists are quite good at presenting what they want the world to know about them in English, sometimes the more awkward information doesn’t make it out of Hebrew.

    So, in case this latest landmark in Jewish commercial success is not properly noted in Forbes or The Wall Street Journal, I’m providing my translation of the Arabic version by of the Hebrew report.

    Eric Plano, Texas, is our website’s resident Arabic expert


    by Christopher Bollyn
    10 December 2002

    An Israeli parliamentary report found that thousands of non-Jewish women remain enslaved in Israel’s sex industry, and that traffickers go unpunished.
    However, with billions of dollars in U.S. aid at stake, the State Dept. says Israel is making “significant efforts” to eliminate human trafficking.
    Update: instead of eliminating the sex slave trade, news reports are showing that it is increasing in Israel. For example, in 2005:


    3,000-5,000 Women Smuggled Into Country In Last Four Years
    JERUSALEM, March 23, 2005

    Many people dismiss the sex slave problem on the grounds that it doesn’t affect them because the only people caught in the trade are stupid or mentally ill.
    However, the evidence is overwhelming that the customers of the sex slaves are sometimes promoted into leadership in the government, media, military, and business, thereby giving Israel control over our nation. This blackmail issue affects all of us.
    The people who purchased Johnny Gosch and the other two boys in this photo had a lot of money, so they may be influential members of American society.

    When Israel was black listed by the U.S. State Dept. in 2001 for being among the nations that facilitate the slave trade by failing to take “significant efforts” to eliminate human trafficking, billions of dollars in U.S. aid were in jeopardy. However, despite a damning Israeli government report criticizing the Jewish state for being lax on traffickers, who go unpunished, the State Dept. has upgraded Israel’s status, removing the possibility of meaningful sanctions.

    Under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (2000), beginning with the 2003 report, countries that fail to make “significant efforts” to prevent the trading of human beings will be subject to termination of non-humanitarian, non-trade-related assistance.
    Although the government of Israel still does not meet the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking, the State Dept. says it is “making significant efforts” to do so.
    “Israel,” Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said on June 5, when the 2002 trafficking report favorable to Israel was released, “worked with us to significantly strengthen their anti-trafficking efforts.”
    “Israel,” Nancy Ely-Raphel from the Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons added, had “aggressively pursued anti-trafficking initiatives since the first report was issued last year.”

    Six months later, however, a special Israeli parliamentary committee looking into the slave trade in Israel challenges the claims made by senior State Dept. officials. The special report revealed that “3,000 women are sold each year in Israel’s sex industry, in transactions with an annual volume of $1 billion,” according to the Israeli daily Ha’aretz.

    The report described Israel’s sex industry as a “modern form of slavery.”
    Most of the women slaves are sold to the owners of some 250 brothels in the Tel Aviv area, according to The Jerusalem Post. There are an estimated 300 to 400 brothels engaged in Israel’s slave trade, it said.
    Victims trapped in the sex industry “suffer physical and emotional abuse, rape, threats against self and family, passport theft, and physical restraint,” according to a State Dept. description.
    The women, mostly from the republics of the former Soviet Union, are usually smuggled in by traffickers who promise them legitimate jobs. The report said the borders with Egypt should be better controlled, making the dubious claim that it is along this border that women were being smuggled into the country.

    Because Israel has some of the tightest border controls in the world it is highly unlikely that thousands of women could be “smuggled” into the country without the knowledge and acquiescence of the highest authorities.

    Once in Israel, the women are sold and forced to work in the sex industry. They receive $25 – $30 per customer, of which the pimp takes between 80 and 90 percent, the report said. The women are forced to work 12 hours a day, six or seven days a week and receive an average of 10 to 15 clients daily, the report said.

    Testimony provided by sex workers – and minors – who appeared before the Israeli parliamentary committee detailed the abusive, criminal aspects of trafficking. After the women are purchased, their passports are confiscated and they have to “buy back” their freedom, enduring constant threats, coercion and rape, the report said.
    Under current Israeli enforcement procedures, most attempts to prosecute trafficking offenders end in plea bargain agreements and light sentences of public service work, or brief prison terms. The report says that current Israeli law enforcement efforts against pimps and slave traders are “inadequate”.

    Israeli judges do not deliver harsh sentences against convicted slave traders, Ha’aretz wrote. Although the maximum is 16 years in jail, the courts have made a travesty of the laws, the report said. The lengthiest sentence handed down against a convicted sex slave trader was four years, yet most sentences are no longer than 18 months. Israeli police do not go after the top echelons of the sex trade industry, Ha’aretz wrote. Most indictments are served against low-level pimps.

    The chairwoman of the committee, Zehava Gal-On, said the Israeli legal system does not have the means necessary to deter traffickers, she said. “When traffickers get to court they get lenient sentences,” she said.

    Gal-On said that since Israel had been placed on the State Department blacklist as a place where “white slavery” thrived, some improvement had been made in Israel.
    Israel’s law against trafficking remains fundamentally flawed because, like all Israeli law, there is a different standard for Jews and non-Jews. According to an Israeli expert who exposed this double standard within Israeli law, the late Israel Shahak, under Jewish laws “racist definition, all women who happen to have been born non-Jewish are automatically considered to be ‘harlots’.”

    American Free Press asked the State Department’s office dealing with human trafficking why Israel’s status had been upgraded when there is no evidence that any significant effort had been made to halt the trade in human beings.
    “Israel is one of the leaders in the Middle East,” an official who asked to remain anonymous said, “they are trying to clean up their act.” The official said that nobody would speak on the record on this matter.

    Asked about the racial double standard inherent in Israeli law, the official said, “The color of law” would be something they would be interested in seeing changed.


    Source: Amnesty International – News Release – MDE 15/24/00, 18 May 2000
    Israeli Government Must Stop Human Rights Abuses Against Trafficked Women

    “I had a nervous breakdown. I wanted to escape from this place and asked a client to help me. He turned out to be one of them and I was beaten up by the owners. There was nowhere to run — there were bars on the windows and bodyguards all the time, day and night.” (Testimony of a woman trafficked from Moldova)

    The Israeli government is failing to protect the human rights of women and girls who are trafficked from countries of the former Soviet Union to work in Israel’s sex industry, Amnesty International said today in a new report.

    “Many of these women and girls become ‘commodities’, literally bought and sold for thousands of dollars or held in debt bondage. They are locked up in apartments and have their passports and travel tickets confiscated. Many women are subjected to violence, including rape. Yet most of the people who commit such human rights abuses are never brought to justice by the Israeli government,” the organization said.

    Anna, a 31-year-old physics teacher from the Russian Federation was lured to Israel by the promise of a job in the sex industry earning 20 times her Russian salary. When she arrived, her passport was taken from her and she was locked in an apartment with bars on the windows along with six other women from former Soviet Union countries. She was auctioned twice, on the second occasion for US$10,000. The women were rarely allowed to leave the apartment and never allowed out alone. Much of the money they earned was extorted from them by their pimps.

    The worldwide phenomenon of trafficking in human beings has attracted increased attention in recent years from governments and intergovernmental organizations. But governments have tended to ignore the human rights abuses to which trafficked persons are subjected, instead viewing trafficking primarily as an issue of organized crime and illegal immigration.

    Rather than taking action against human rights abuses experienced by the women, Israeli governmental agencies in effect treat them as criminals, by holding women in detention for extended periods, for example. In 1998, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed its regret that “women brought to Israel for the purposes of prostitution … are not protected as victims of trafficking but are likely to bear the penalties of their illegal presence in Israel by deportation.”

    Many trafficked women end up in detention in a police lock-up or Neve Tirza prison following raids on brothels and massage parlours by the police and they are rarely released on bail pending deportation. Others may be detained for longer, sometimes because the Ministry of Justice has issued an order preventing the woman from leaving the country until she has testified in a criminal case.

    Israeli officials maintain that it is difficult to bring to justice persons who commit human rights abuses against women in sex work who are illegally in the country. However, various Israeli laws and policies, in particular the strict enforcement of immigration laws against these women, actually make prosecutions difficult.

    Moreover, many women are afraid to file complaints with the Israel Police or testify in court because they fear they will be imprisoned, deported or be subjected to further human rights abuses in Israel or abroad. Despite these realistic fears, the government officials tend to blame the women for not cooperating with the police and the criminal justice system.

    As a result of lobbying by local non-governmental organizations, Israel has taken some steps that would help combat human rights abuses against women in these circumstances, particularly in the field of legislation. In March 2000 the Knesset (Israel’s Parliament) passed the Equality of Women Law, which states that every woman is entitled to protection from violence, sexual harassment, sexual exploitation and trafficking in her person. The Ministry of Justice is said to be drafting a provision to criminalize the buying and selling of persons.

    Amnesty International believes that the steps taken by Israel are insufficient and it is urging the Israeli government to respect its obligations under international law to ensure the human rights of all who are in its territory. Amnesty International is recommending that the Israeli government should develop a strategy to ensure there is coordinated and effective action by key government agencies, such as the Ministry of the Interior, the Israel Police, the Israel Prisons Service and the Office of the State Attorney, to ensure the protection of these rights. NGOs should be consulted and invited to contribute to developing effective policies.

    The organization is also calling for increased international cooperation between Israel and the governments of former Soviet Union countries and transit states to combat these human rights abuses.

    “Both the government and the traffickers are treating these women as if they do not have human rights. The authorities have a responsibility to take action to protect the against enslavement, deprivation of liberty and violence,” Amnesty International said.


    The human rights abuses experienced by women trafficked into Israel’s sex industry include enslavement, including debt bondage; deprivation of liberty, for example by confiscating women’s passports and other travel documents or threatening them with violence if they escape; violations of the right to bodily integrity, including subjection to violence including rape and other forms of coerced sexual activity; denial of health services and other risks to health rights such as exposure to HIV/AIDS because of coercive work conditions and denial of condom use. Many sex workers who have not been trafficked are subjected to human rights abuses.
    Amnesty International notes that although this report focuses on human rights abuses committed against women from the former Soviet Union working in the sex industry, women also face human rights abuses when they are trafficked for other purposes including domestic work, bonded labour and servile forms of marriage.
    Source: Amnesty International, International Secretariat, 1 Easton Street, WC1X 8DJ, London, United Kingdom


    February 15, 2008 at 13:09 (Israel)

    The wall of Apartheid in Israel has made it virtually impossible for many Palestinian workers to cross over to the Israeli side for work purposes. This has resulted in a mass influx of foreign workers, especially those that work as caregivers for the old and sick of the nation. Hundreds of thousands of these people are in Israel today, most with valid visas, many who are here illegally.

    The tales they tell are unbelievably shameful and expose yet another aspect of the racism inherent in Zionism…. I’ll deal with just one of these stories in this post, but keep in mind that this is just one of a thousand of such examples…
    A disabled man was approached not long ago by a man who asked if he had or needed a caregiver. The disabled person was wheelchair bound which made him an ‘easy target’ for the scam in the making….
    He was informed that he could get a worker in his home for ten hours a week and it would not cost him a thing…. that’s a hard offer to refuse.
    Papers were filled out, documents were signed, interviews with government agencies, etc., etc….
    Finally, all was approved and a foreign worker from Sri Lanka was on his way to what he hoped would be a possible way to make a few bucks to help his destitute family back home…. BOY, was he in for a surprise!

    Upon arrival in Israel the ‘agency’ that brought him here demanded $1,500 up front to start the process of obtaining the proper documents for his employment. At the Minister of Interior’s office he had to shell out another $40 to get the work permit stamped in his passport…
    He was then ready to go to work….. but where?
    His visa was obtained in the name of the disabled man mentioned at the beginning of this post…. but he won’t actually be working for him full time… just for 10 hours a week… at no cost to him. What happens the rest of the week??, and who pays this worker for the 10 ‘free hours’ of labour???
    The ‘agency’ arranges for this worker to perform his duties as caregiver in someone else’s home…. someone that was not able to obtain a visa in their own name. The wage is way below the minimum, the hours are long, and the person must be available during his ‘free time’. Accommodation is often provided at a fee…. usually higher than one would normally pay. At the end of the month, his salary is barely enough for him to survive, let alone send money to his family as was planned….
    The ten ‘free hours’ are ‘payment’ to the original person for obtaining the visa.. NO ONE PAYS FOR IT…. the worker is a virtual slave to this person.
    This entire procedure is considered the ‘norm’ in Israel…. as it was in the southern American States after slavery was officially ended. It is a demonstration of the non-value of life placed upon those ‘not of the tribe’ by the Israeli government.
    What happens if this worker refuses to do his ‘obligated’ free hours? Simple, his visa is revoked and he darts off to unknown territory and becomes a soldier in the army of illegal immigrants… eventually caught and deported…. AT THEIR OWN EXPENSE….

    The ‘agency’ then arranges to bring over a new worker from abroad and the entire process is repeated as well as more money going into the coffers of these scam masters.
    In this particular case, the worker had a lucky streak…. he told the original person involved what was going on…. the man was shocked beyond belief. He told the worker that he would not have to work for him, that he would not report this and his visa would not be canceled. He was then free to work wherever he wanted, legally.

    The ‘agency’ got wind of the situation and visited the disabled person at home, wanting to know why the worker was not doing his ‘time’ for him. The man explained that he did not need his services as he had a regular worker come in once a week to clean the house, that was all he required… simple explanation…. but not so simple reaction…
    The agency contacted the foreign worker, told him that he would have to give them an additional $150 a month to cover the cost of the man’s cleaning help… or they would cancel his visa. Can we call this blackmail??

    The worker then visited the man and wanted to know if he intended to cancel his visa… he was told that he was promised otherwise and not to worry and NOT TO GIVE THE ‘AGENCY’ THE $150…. the ‘agency’ could NOT cancel the visa without the man’s approval.

    In this case, the worker continues to function legally with no fear of deportation…. the ‘agency’ lost out on their scam… and all ended well. This is not the case for thousands of others who are virtually slaves to this inhumane system… a system known about and allowed to continue by the zionist regime…

    Israel does not discriminate in who they discriminate against… racism, exploitation, occupation, and now slavery are an integral part of their system… I wonder what Abe Foxman would say about all of this…. I’m sure one of his cronies will direct him to this post.


    Steven Spielberg’s pseudo-historical film about a 19th-century mutiny and massacre aboard a Spanish slave ship, Amistad, and the subsequent trial of the Black mutineers is being praised by the reviewers. Spielberg, one of the wealthiest and most successful of Hollywood’s Jewish film makers, is also being praised by his kinsmen in various so-called “human rights” organizations for using his propaganda skills to sensitize White, Gentile audiences to the horrors of slavery and make them feel just a little more guilty for treating non-Whites so badly in the past. What the film doesn’t mention, of course, is that Spielberg’s Jewish kinsmen owned many, though not all, of the ships involved in the 18th- and 19th-century Atlantic trade in Black slaves and, in fact, played a very prominent role in bringing Black slaves to America.
    The film tends to steer one away from blaming anyone for slavery except White Gentiles. This bit of misdirection is interesting in light of the fact that Jews have been dominant in the slave trade since at least Roman times — especially the trade in White slaves. Jewish slave dealers followed Caesar’s armies everywhere — into Gaul, into Germany, and into other northern lands — eager to buy as slaves all of the captives of the Romans — especially the female captives.

    Jews have remained dominant in the White slave trade until the present day — although during the Middle Ages the Christian Church tried unsuccessfully a number of times to stop them, beginning in the fifth century with an edict by the emperor Theodosius II against Jews owning Christian slaves. After being banned from owning or dealing in slaves by one emperor, the Jews would wait until the next emperor came along, then they would buy a charter giving them a monopoly in the slave trade. Then public outrage against the Jews would grow until another emperor would ban their slave-dealing again. Most of the time, however, the Jews were the undisputed masters of the White slave trade, and that is still the case today.

    Interestingly enough, this fact was revealed in a recent news report in the Jewish newspaper the New York Times, of all places. The January 11 issue has a major article titled “Contraband Women” and written by a Jewish reporter in Israel. The article deals specifically with the Jewish trade in Ukrainian and Russian women — although it doesn’t label the trade as “Jewish.” What the report does say is this:

    Centered in Moscow and the Ukrainian capital Kiev, the networks trafficking women run east to Japan and Thailand, where thousands of young Slavic women now work against their will as prostitutes, and west to the Adriatic coast and beyond. The routes are controlled by Russian crime gangs based in Moscow.

    What the reader must understand is that these crime gangs don’t have a real Russian in them. They are entirely Jewish, but the agreed-upon subterfuge used by the newspapers in this country is to refer to them as “Russian” rather than as Jewish. Thus one reads in various news organs about the recent takeover of organized crime in many areas of America — especially the East Coast and Los Angeles — by “Russian gangs” and of the viciousness and cleverness of these “Russian” gangsters, but there is never any mention of the fact that they are not Russians at all, but Jews from the former Soviet Union: Jews like Mr. Clinton’s supporter Vadim Rabinovich, photographed shaking hands with Clinton at a Miami fundraiser when he was illegally in the United States, as I mentioned in my broadcast of December 27, 1997.

    The story of the exploitation of eastern Europe by the Jews is a fascinating and infuriating story. Throughout the Middle Ages and into the modern era they focused on profiting from the weaknesses and vices of the Gentile populations of Poles, Russians, Ukrainians and others among whom they lived as a barely tolerated minority. In addition to being the moneylenders, they controlled the liquor business and owned the drinking establishments, the gambling dens, and the brothels. A number of 19th-century Russian writers, among them Dostoievski and Gogol, have described their destructive effects on Slavic peasant society and the perpetual condition of mutual hostility which existed between the Jews and the Slavs.

    During the 19th and early 20th centuries the Jewish trade in White slaves from these lands expanded enormously. It has been described by the Jewish historian Edward Bristow in his 1982 book Prostitution and Prejudice, published by Oxford University Press and Schocken Books in New York. Although Bristow’s book is written from the viewpoint of one opposed to this Jewish trade in women, it is nevertheless enormously revealing. The Jews recruited peasant girls in Polish and Russian villages, usually under false pretenses, and transported them to brothels in Turkey, Egypt, and other parts of the Middle East; to Vienna, Budapest, and other major cities in the Austro-Hungarian Empire; and as far away as New York, New Orleans, and Buenos Aires. This Jewish trade in Slavic women naturally caused a great deal of hatred against the Jews by the Slavs, and this hatred broke out in pogroms and other popular actions against the Jews over and over again.

    One would believe from the works of Mr. Spielberg and other Jewish propagandists that the hatred the Slavs bore against the Jews was based only on religious bigotry and that the Jews were completely innocent and inoffensive. One fascinating fact which Bristow’s book reveals is that the center of the Jewish trade in Polish girls was in a little town called Oswiecim. The German name for this town was Auschwitz.

    I don’t mean to imply that the Jews were the only ones at fault in the White slave trade. Gentile politicians and police officials gladly accepted bribes from the Jews and in return allowed them to carry on their dirty business. And in the United States non-Jewish criminal elements such as the Mafia collaborated with the Jews or ran their own White slave operations. But the trade in White slaves from eastern Europe has been an exclusively Jewish activity for the last 200 years.

    It is ironic that another Jewish enterprise, organized Marxism, put a temporary crimp in the Jewish trade in Slavic women. When the Jewish Bolsheviks seized control of Russia and Ukraine after the First World War, and of Poland and other Slavic lands after the Second World War, they clamped down on all capitalist activity, including that of their Jewish brethren in the White slave business. What they did instead was establish a huge empire of slave-labor camps, of which Alexander Solzhenitsyn has written so eloquently. Jewish slave dealers became commissars and slave camp bosses. And of course, they butchered their Gentile opponents by the millions. The time of communism was the Jews’ time for getting rid of all of the Russian and Ukrainian patriots, who had hated them for so long.

    Actually, some capitalist activity did survive throughout the communist years in the form of organized crime. Two excellent books on the subject were published in the United States, both written by Soviet Jews thoroughly familiar with organized crime in the Soviet Union. In fact, one of the authors, Yuri Brokhin, was a former member of a Jewish organized crime gang in Russia, where he worked as a pimp. His book, Hustling on Gorky Street, was published in 1975 by Dial Press.

    The other author, Konstantin Simis, was a Jewish defense lawyer for organized Jewish criminals. His book, USSR: The Corrupt Society, was published in 1982 by Simon and Schuster. Both of these Jewish authors write quite frankly about the Jewish domination of organized crime during the communist years. Brokhin brags about it, in fact. He says Russians and other Slavs can only be ordinary criminals, depending on guns and strong-arm tactics, but they aren’t smart enough for successful, large-scale organized crime; only Jews are smart enough for that.

    A factor neither author mentions which was more important than smartness was the connections Jewish criminals had with Jewish communists in the Soviet bureaucracy. When Abe, who ran a prostitution and drug racket in Moscow, could count on his cousin Hymie in the prosecutor’s office to keep him informed about police plans for raids, as well as a little covert assistance if matters ever came to court, he had a distinct advantage over his Russian competitors.

    Eventually communism bled eastern Europe dry, and with the economies of the countries under their control on the verge of collapse the communists switched hats, declared themselves “democrats” instead of communists, and announced a return to capitalism. The Jewish slave dealers went back into business, and business was good for them. Other Jewish communists went into business too. As the economies were “privatized” — that is, as state-owned factories and businesses were sold to private entrepreneurs at bargain-basement prices — Jews used their connections with their now-“democratic” kinsmen in the bureaucracies to snap them up. Other Jews, who had monopolized organized crime during the communist years, remained as organized crime bosses but greatly expanded the scope of their operations. Often, the new entrepreneurs and the new crime bosses are the same people.

    The richest man in Russia today is Boris Berezovsky, who since the collapse of communism has become a multi-billionaire by buying up banks, television networks, and newspapers from the government, with the aid of his fellow Jews still in the bureaucracy. Berezovsky speeds around Moscow in a bulletproof vest and an armored limousine, and anyone who gets in the way of his business interests has a tendency to get shot or simply to disappear. Second only to Berezovsky in wealth is another Jewish media mogul, Vladimir Gusinsky. Between them, Berezovsky and Gusinsky control most of the mass media in Russia. They also exercise pretty thorough control of Boris Yeltsin, Russia’s alcoholic president, who is sort of a Slavic version of Bill Clinton, plus vodka. It was only through the support of Berezovsky’s and Gusinsky’s media that Yeltsin won his last election.

    If you remember, Clinton and all of the Jewish media in the United States also were rooting enthusiastically for Yeltsin during that election. They all were afraid that a genuine Russian patriot might beat Yeltsin, in which case the Jewish control of Russia would have been finished.

    After the election, Yeltsin appointed Berezovsky to Russia’s national security council, but when some of the few media in Russia which still are independent publicized Berezovsky’s connections to Jewish organized crime gangs, Yeltsin was forced to fire him. Yeltsin has made up for that, however, by appointing another Jew, Boris Nemtsov, to the position of deputy prime minister, one of the most powerful positions in the government. One thing Yeltsin never has done, however, is make any move to curtail the operations of Russia’s organized Jewish crime gangs, which are running rampant through the country and displaying their wealth and power, while ordinary Russians struggle to feed themselves and keep their homes warm this winter.

    And tens of thousands of pretty but naive young Russian and Ukrainian women are being swept up by the Jewish gangs — called “Russian” gangs by the New York Times — and shipped off to a life of misery and degradation in Turkey, Pakistan, Thailand, and Israel, as well as to countries in western Europe, where Jews also control organized crime. The young women, unable to find work in Russia, Ukraine, or Poland and facing a bleak future in countries ravaged by decades of communism, are eager for any chance at a better life. They respond to advertisements that offer them work abroad as receptionists or secretaries and also promise free training and transportation. When the girls arrive at their destinations, however, they find something quite different — but by then it is too late.

    One of these girls, Irina, a 21-year-old, green-eyed Ukrainian blond, was interviewed in Israel. She told how her Israeli employer took her to a brothel soon after her arrival in Israel. He took her passport away from her, burned it before her eyes, and told her that she now was his property and must work in the brothel. When Irina refused, she was beaten and raped. Luckier than most of the Slavic women lured to Israel, Irina eventually was swept up in a police raid and sent to prison as an illegal alien. She was awaiting deportation, along with hundreds of other Russian and Ukrainian women, when she was interviewed. She lamented the fact that the Israeli who had raped her and forced her to work in the brothel was not even arrested. Indeed, according to Jewish law, the rape of a Gentile woman is not illegal. Nor is it illegal in Israel to buy and sell slaves, so long as the slaves are not Jewish. Amazingly, the New York Times article reveals this fact.

    The White slave trade is big business in Israel. Ukrainian authorities estimate that as many as 40,000 Ukrainian women under the age of 30 are taken from Ukraine each year. Some of these women respond to advertisements promising employment abroad, like Irina did, and some are simply kidnapped and smuggled out of the country. Those who try to escape from their Jewish captors are treated brutally. Often they are butchered in front of other captive women to keep the others terrified into doing whatever they are told. At slave markets operated by the Jewish gangs in Italy young Slavic women are stripped, put on blocks, and auctioned off to brothel owners.
    The most astounding thing about this whole, filthy business is that most people are forced to learn about it from a Jewish newspaper like the New York Times. And really, you should read for yourself the article to which I referred. It was in the January 11, 1998, issue, and the news is not likely to be repeated.

    Ask yourself, why doesn’t Interpol, the international police agency, do something to put a stop to this White slave trade? Why don’t the governments of the countries from which the women are being abducted do something? Why don’t the mass media raise a hue and cry? Why don’t powerful feminist organizations demand the eradication of White slavery?

    And the answer to all of these questions is easy: they dare not do or say anything because it is a Jewish business. In places like Germany, where the Jews have almost total control of organized crime, anyone who announces that fact publicly will be arrested and charged with “inciting racial hatred.” Germany and most other European countries have laws against what they call “hate speech.” Saying anything negative about Jews, true or not, invokes these laws.
    Jewish organizations — and of course, the Clinton administration — would like very much to have similar laws in the United States. Interpol, which has plenty of other work to keep it busy, is not eager to be charged with “anti-Semitism” by going after the Jewish White-slave gangs. Even if Interpol did arrest the gangsters, it wouldn’t do much good, because the fix is in nearly everywhere. There’s a huge amount of money made from selling women: enough money to pay off politicians, bureaucrats, judges, and policemen.

    Jews like to say about the so-called “Holocaust” of the Second World War, “Never again.” They like to talk about how it is necessary to stamp out anti-Semitism and pass laws against so-called “hate speech,” so that there can never be another “Holocaust.” But by their own behavior they guarantee that there will be.

    While some Jews beat the drums for more reparations payments from Switzerland, Germany, France, and other countries they claim didn’t treat them right or took some of their ill-gotten gold from them 55 or 60 years ago, other Jews are still bleeding countries like Poland, Ukraine, Russia, and the Baltic nations of money and of their young women. Countries which suffered for decades under the brutal rule of communist commissars are still being exploited by the same people, now calling themselves “democrats.”

    The Jews believe that with their death grip on the mass media nearly everywhere, with their puppets — like Bill Clinton, Bush and Obama — in positions of power in the East and in the West, with the enormous wealth they have at their disposal, and with so many Gentiles buffaloed by “Holocaust” propaganda of the sort cranked out by Steven Spielberg and a hundred others, they can keep getting away with their exploitation of us forever. But they are wrong. They themselves are building up the hatred and the resentment and the rage which will destroy them. It will destroy them all: the gang members, the media bosses, the “advisers” to Bill Clinton, Bush and Obama, the professional “Holocaust” wailers, the former commissars, and the rest, even those who are not currently involved in any of these activities. They are guaranteeing that there will be another “Holocaust.” And this time it will be a real one.


    • The problem with that statement is that the article is well-supported with links and citations of various kinds and your statement is supported by … nothing… 😂😂

    • Well, considering that they used and documented factual, proven information that can be found in numerous lists cations and courts, it’s kind of hard to accept your “like really, this is BS” OPINION! 😂😂😂

  4. Pingback: The Surviving Assassins of Malcolm X | Hence the Infamy

  5. Pingback: Louis Farrakhan Meets President Reagan @ the WHITE HOUSE (1984) 😮 | Politics Story

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.