Obama Administration Protecting the Black Panthers

[Varmit]

WND TV

'Want freedom? Kill some crackers!'
New Black Panther Obama DOJ refused to prosecute: 'I hate white people – all of them!'

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: July 07, 2010
11:45 pm Eastern


By Chelsea Schilling
© 2010 WorldNetDaily



Minister King Samir Shabazz, aka Maurice Heath (photo: Can't Stop the Bleeding blog)


"You want freedom? You're gonna have to kill some crackers! You're gonna have to kill some of their babies!"

Those were the words of Minister King Samir Shabazz, also known as Maurice Heath, the New Black Panther Party's Philadelphia leader.

Shabazz is the same man the Obama administration Department of Justice refused to prosecute after he was filmed on Election Day 2008 with Jerry Jackson wearing paramilitary uniforms, carrying a nightstick and blocking a doorway to a polling location to intimidate voters.

The following YouTube video posted by Naked Emperor News shows his statements during a National Geographic special on the New Black Panthers:



"I hate white people – all of them! Every last iota of a cracker, I hate 'em," Shabazz shouts into a megaphone on a crowded sidewalk. "Through South Street with white, dirty, cracker whore [expletive] on our arms. And we call ourselves black men with African garb on."

Then Shabazz spotted a black man embracing a white woman.

"What the hell is wrong with you, black man?" he shouted into his megaphone. "You [inaudible] with a white girl on your damn arm!

"You want freedom? You're gonna have to kill some crackers! You're gonna have to kill some of their babies!"

In a 2008 interview with the Philadelphia Inquirer, Sabazz said, "I'm about the total destruction of white people. I'm about the total liberation of black people. I hate white people. I hate my enemy. ..."

National Geographic describes the New Black Panther Party as "a militant hate group headquartered in Washington, D.C., that seeks to redefine the black struggle for equality and demand liberation from what it sees as white supremacy."

The party has marched on Independence Day, dragging American flags through the streets, trampling the flag on the ground and setting it on fire. The following video shows members of a New York chapter protesting celebration of Independence Day at an event called "4th of U-lie" on July 5, 2008. Members say the day is not a celebration of independence for blacks.






As WND reported, one poll watcher called police on Nov. 4, 2008, after he reportedly saw Shabazz brandishing a nightstick to threaten voters just 15 feet outside a Philadelphia polling location. Shabazz stood in front of the building with Jackson.

"As I walked up, they closed ranks, next to each other," the witness told Fox News at the time. "So I walked directly in between them, went inside and found the poll watchers. They said they'd been here for about an hour. And they told us not to come outside because a black man is going to win this election no matter what."

He said the man with a nightstick told him, "'We're tired of white supremacy,' and he starts tapping the nightstick in his hand. At which point I said, 'OK, we're not going to get in a fistfight right here,' and I called the police."

According to various witnesses, the men also hurled racial epithets such as "white devil" and "cracker" and told voters they should prepare to be "ruled by the black man." One person said the men called a Republican poll worker a "race traitor" and told him there would be "hell to pay."

The following is a YouTube video of the Election Day incident:

Career Department of Justice attorneys headed by voting-section chief Chris Coates filed a case under Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 against four defendants, accused the men of attempting to engage in, and engaging in, both voter intimidation and intimidation of individuals aiding voters.

The original Department of Justice complaint named Shabazz, Jackson and two other defendants: the New Black Panther Party and its chairman, Malik Zulu Shabazz, who planned deployment of 300 members on Election Day.

A federal judge ordered default judgments against the New Black Panthers after party members refused to appear in court. The DOJ trial team had won its case.

Even though DOJ lawyers had won, the Obama administration suddenly ordered it dropped – against advice of prosecutors who brought the case.

In April, the New Black Panther Party released a statement blaming Republicans, "tea-party racists" and "right-wing circles" for complaining and harassing the organization.

"Our only connection to President Obama is the common color of our skin," it states. "The same dog that bites President Obama bites us too. So I say, if you were wise, you would leave Obama alone as well because he is your last chance to save your country. You are mad because a black man has been elected to the presidency, and that affronts your oversized ego."

Christian Adams, a former DOJ attorney who quit his job after over the Obama administration's refusal to prosecute the Panthers, claims the administration has ordered the DOJ not to pursue voting-rights cases against black people. He said the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, which is investigating the dismissal, subpoenaed him and Coates, but their DOJ superiors ordered them not to testify – a violation of federal law.

"The case was dismissed on May 15, [2009]," Adams told Fox News. "All the charges were dropped against three of the defendants and the final order against one of the defendants was a timid restraint."

Only one of four defendants, Samir Shabazz, faced punishment: a temporary injunction against appearing at Philadelphia polls with a weapon. The department stopped at the injunction and didn't call for criminal penalties, monetary damages or other civil penalties.

"We were ordered to dismiss the case," Adams said. "I mean, we were told drop the charges against the New Black Panther Party."

The Department of Justice said it made a decision based on the evidence that the case could not go forward.

As WND reported, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights has suggested it is now expanding its review of claims that the DOJ implemented a ban on prosecuting defendants who are black.

At a hearing in Washington this week, Adams testified that staffers throughout the department have subscribed for years to the notion that the DOJ's primary responsibility is to protect the voting rights of minority voters, not whites. He added that recent Obama administration DOJ appointees have reinforced this notion by making such racial discrimination a formal departmental policy.

According to Adams, Deputy Assistant Attorney General Julie Fernandez, an Obama appointee at the top of the department, announced at a policy meeting that "the voting section will not bring any other cases against blacks and other minorities."

Meanwhile, Pajamas Media reports that three more former DOJ officials are stepping forward to support Adams' testimony. According to the report, the former employees have "expressed a willingness to go on record regarding Adams' professionalism, excellent performance and outstanding record of enforcing the law without bias."

Pajamas Media adds, "Additionally, they would like to corroborate Adams' statements about the DOJ" and even offer their own accounts of purported DOJ hostility to "race-neutral law enforcement."

Asheesh Agarwal, former deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division, worked with Adams on several cases. He called Adams a "model attorney who vigorously enforced federal voting-rights laws on behalf of all voters, without respect to race or ideology."

Mark Corallo, former DOJ director of public affairs, added: "I am not surprised that the Department is attacking J. Christian Adams. The Civil Rights Division attorneys have no interest in the rule of law as written and passed by Congress – the New Black Panther case is glaring proof that the Division has an agenda. If Congress was truly interested in oversight, there would be hearings on this case and others."

Finally, Robert Driscoll, former deputy assistant attorney general who knew Adams, told Pajamas Media:

If this is indeed the view of senior career DOJ staff – that after reviewing the facts of the New Black Panther case and the video, current laws against voter intimidation provide no ability for the DOJ to properly bring an action against the New Black Panther members shown on video and mentioned in the lawsuit — then Congress needs to have a conversation with Attorney General Holder about whether the problem lies with the Voting Rights Act itself, or with those whose job it is to enforce it

[kshillbillys]

Varmit, this is the exact point I was trying to make when we put the link to the video clip of that BOY, but I was told that it did not happen and that if there would've been a problem he would've been arrested (and he was) and that I was just racist for putting it on here and obviously just an all out Elk County Retard because I don't live 82 miles from where it happened.  Keep up the good work. Obviously this is just one of many incidents and for people who actually watch the news, CNN and Fox News reported on this.


MR. KSH

[Diane Amberg]

Hey, you better not be talking about me. I never called anybody a racist over this nor would I .But I do have a question. After all the tea party hoo-ha, it would have been OK for a white person to show up  outside a polling place with an AK 47 slung over their shoulder?They would have dared anybody to say anything about their rights. This guy who had the club...it was a baton or some such looked scary, but as far as I know from our local news coverage here, there were no complaints and no one acted scared or intimidated. Which would you be more intimidated by, a stranger with an weapon over his arm demanding his rights to his weapon or a guy from the local neighborhood, who people knew, with a club? Do you all want to believe because it suits you? I wish my computer skills were better but they aren't .How about another view? Read this. A Penigma- A Mystery Under A Pseudonym and see another point of view. I'm not sure after all this time the real truth will ever be know other than to say nobody was touched and free speech means you have to put up with nasty mouths sometimes, just like I do.

[kshillbillys]

You missed the point...It's against the law. You're gonna put up with a lot more name calling if you don't get it this time. IT IS AGAINST THE LAW FOR VOTER INTIMIDATION NO MATTER WHO IN THE HELL IT IS! At any polling center in the United States. As far as I know, the Tea Party is a demonstration against big government, overspending and cramming shit down our throats. Why there was AK47s there, I have no idea. I've seen the footage tho. Nobody at the Tea Party demonstration/rally was VOTING on a damn thing. Just 2words I want to hear Diane...I UNDERSTAND!

MR. KSH

[Diane Amberg]

Please name one person who was intimidated? Not one person claimed to be intimidated. As far as I know there was nobody who didn't go into vote who wanted to. Why would blacks try to keep blacks out? They did not block the doors according to the newspaper article I saw, and nobody told the poll watchers or the police or anybody they were intimidated, except the camera guy, who wasn't going to be allowed inside anyway. With the exception of a politician who is voting, cameras aren't allowed inside polling places. Now don't get me wrong, on a general day I can't stand the black panthers. They are a foul mouthed bunch of rabble rousers who certainly could have done exactly what they were accused of. But that particular day, in that black neighborhood, except for being too close, and when asked to move they did, they didn't do anything worthy of all this attention. They must be loving it. They had supposedly heard rumors that some tough whites were going to cause trouble there and try to intimidate blacks from going in. I'm not sure anybody knows the truth about that. As far as the vile verbal spew that is usually credited to them, I'd never doubt it for a minute. Anti white speech? Sure, every chance they get. But like it or not, their free speech, as vile as it might be, is protected too, especially in Philadelphia where it all started. Something I was reading just recently,"Listeners emotional reaction to speech cannot serve as a justification for censorship. Citizens must tolerate insulting and even outrageous speech in order to provide adequate  breathing space to freedoms protected by the first amendment."You might recognize that. If not I'll tell you where it came from.

[Anmar]

Varmit, in a previous post, you said he wasnt prosecuted.  Then in the article you copy/pasted,  it says that he was prosecuted.  Make up your mind.  Also, where do you stand on right wingers bringing guns to Obama rallies in the election?

[Warph]

Bringing guns to Obama rallies ?  Hmmmmm..... not a bad idea.

[Anmar]

Bringing guns to Obama rallies ?  Hmmmmm..... not a bad idea.

It happened several times 2  years ago, we discussed it on the forums.  You missed the boat.

[Diane Amberg]

I do feel bad that some here have gotten so sucked into this black panther thing. Some are giving this exactly what the black panthers wanted. free publicity. I don't know why the "whisper down the lane" has started now, all this time later. That polling area is very black and very Democrat.The comment that was supposedly made about the "Democrats winning anyway" was very true. The people who were assigned to vote there, live there. I don't know about Elk County and whether you have assigned places to vote or not, but here we do.  Everyone who would have gone to vote there, lived there. They knew they lived in a black community and were voting for a black presidential candidate for the first time.They are a huge voting block there, not some tiny segment that nobody notices or pays any attention to.
Keep in mind Philly has a lot of black people and a black Mayor and some black council people.They are not the same people as the judges and court system. I don't know what their racial make up is and I'm not going to look it up. If you are interested, you can do that yourself.  
Frankly, I hadn't give this much thought until it turned into such a big deal on here. Please check the time line and all the players in this mess once it did go to the legal system. So much has been made about the criminal charges having been dropped. Pres. O wasn't even in office yet. It was lowered previously to to a civil action which is very different matter and yes, I know the when, how, and who for when that was dropped. Unfortunately that is the privilege of politics. If you must go all the way to the top with this, then the Bush gang lowered the charges because they knew it wasn't winnable and the Obama gang went ahead and dropped it. That's what the judges are for, they judge. If the court doesn't think it's worth the court's time they can toss it. I don't necessarily like it either, but it's intention is to weigh the facts evenly and protect everyone.
  If the  BP had hurt anyone, or one of them went right up close into a voter's "personal space",and threatened them, I'd agree 100%. It might even be called assault. But the BP are smart. They know just what they can do and what they can legally get away with. They have legal guidance that watches over every step. I suspect they even met before election day and were coached on how much they could legally get away with. You (plural) measure the value of of the publicity they got.This played right into their hands.
Authority is challenged in this country every day. Organized groups who choose to engage in civil disobedience and/or disruptions for their own reasons run the gamut from A -Z. The Westboro Baptist Church being a good example. That's where that quote I used yesterday came from. That was a legal quote from when the poor father tried to sue and lost.   When it comes to politics this is a very ugly country right now and every political writer, and every person in the media is fighting to keep their bosses and sponsors happy. One of the ways to keep the public masses interested is to play to a high emotional response and hope people don't dig for details and accuracy. So go ahead and cuss me out. That's pretty shallow and troll like, but if it makes someone feel better, OK. I've got my emotional armor on. Besides, Ill be leaving soon to get my hair done and that always makes me feel good.

[jarhead]

Diane, You should be proud of yourself defending King Samir Shabazz. Before he was wielding a night stick intimidating voters he was singing a song saying,"I'm a warrior trained by Khalid Muhammad---I'm a terrorist trained by Usama Bin Ladin" then goes on to sing"bust a cop's ass"
Yea, he is a real sweetheart and one of those "smart black panthers