Re: [sixties-l] Re: Black Panthers (Roz replies)

From: David Horowitz (
Date: Tue Jun 13 2000 - 02:50:35 CUT

  • Next message: David Horowitz: "Re: [sixties-l] Re: Black Panthers (Roz replies[2])"

    Nice way of thinking about all this Roz. If you read the Cointelpro files you
    will see that the FBI engaged in trivial games that had little or no impact on
    their targets. Hugh Pearson interviewed two Panthers because it's very hard to
    get witnesses to talk about a gang that has killed more than dozen people,
    particularly black people, and yet has escaped justice. The fact that I am
    quoted in the book seems to be a taint on the author. Why Roz, did you just
    email me and ask to interview me if that is the case? (I think we can forget
    that interview now.) Kate Coleman, who has written pieces documenting the
    Panthers' criminality and their responsibility for the murder of Betty Van
    Patter is a committed "progressive" in the sense of that term that people on
    this list would understand. Ericka Huggins admitted to boiling water that was
    poured on a young black man's chest, and to going along with the murder of this
    same young man. Consider what this means for the Party as a whole, if someone
    like Ericka Huggins thought this kind of behavior was okay. wrote:

    > From:
    > Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 20:04:21 EDT
    > In a message dated 6/12/00 4:40:57 PM,
    > writes:
    > << First, the idea that an operation like COINTELPRO had some
    > specific end date is like saying that your fall ends after
    > you go splat on the ground. >>
    > cointelpro black extremist files stopped in 1971 but we know that cointelpro
    > continued in other forms.
    > Pearson i belived interviewed only 2 panthers, none of them would speak with
    > him. He quoted David Horowitz about 20 times. So if you read the book
    > remember this
    > Roz Payne

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jun 13 2000 - 02:56:29 CUT