Podcasts about civil rights bill

In this episode, Dr. Wilmer Leon is joined by Chairman Omali Yeshitela to explore the fight for free speech as the Uhuru Three face charges for opposing U.S. government narratives. Together, they uncover the shocking connections between the trial, colonialism, and the global struggle for freedom. Find me and the show on social media. Click the following links or search @DrWilmerLeon on X/Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, Patreon and YouTube! Hey everyone, Dr. Wilmer here! If you've been enjoying my deep dives into the real stories behind the headlines and appreciate the balanced perspective I bring, I'd love your support on my Patreon channel. Your contribution helps me keep "Connecting the Dots" alive, revealing the truth behind the news. Join our community, and together, let's keep uncovering the hidden truths and making sense of the world. Thank you for being a part of this journey! Wilmer Leon (00:00:00): The first amendment of the Constitution reads as follows, Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof or abridging the freedom of speech or the press or the right of people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. With that, here's a very simple question. If Congress cannot make a law abridging, which in law means to diminish or reduce in scope the freedom of speech, then why will the Yahoo three have to go on trial on September 3rd, 2024 in the federal court in Tampa, Florida? If you want to know the answer to that, let's find out Announcer (00:00:53): Connecting the dots with Dr. Wilmer Leon, where the analysis of politics, culture, and history converge. Wilmer Leon (00:01:03): Welcome to the Connecting the Dots podcast with Dr. Wilmer Leon and I am Wilmer Leon. Here's the point. We have a tendency to view current events as though they happen in a vacuum, failing to understand the much broader historical context in which most of these events take place. During each episode of this podcast, my guests and I have probing, provocative, and in-depth discussions that connect the dots between these events and the broader historic context in which they occur. This enables you to better understand and analyze the events and that impact the global village in which we live on today's episode. The issue before us is or are the indictments of the Uru three are the indictments of the Uru three a test case for the federal government. If Chairman Yella, penny Hess and Jesse Neville are convicted in this political attack, will free speech as we know it in this country, no longer exist for anyone. Let's talk with my guest. He's a political activist and author. He's the co-founder and ker chairman of the African People's Socialist Party, which was founded in 1972, and he also leads the Uhuru movement and he's one of the Uhuru 3 Chairman, Omali Yeshitela. Welcome back to the show. Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:02:23): Thank you so very much. It is good to be with you again. This question of free speech is something that reverberates so many means, and this you give me access to speak with your show, and that's extremely important because some people recognize that how people who want to speak affect it negatively if they cannot speak. But many people do not recognize that a free speech attack does not only prevent me from speaking, it prevents people from hearing what I got to say. So it's an assault on people's ability to hear something that the government might not want heard or any other source. And so it's a critical question and it's one of the things that gives such significance being able to be here with you Brother Leon. Wilmer Leon (00:03:19): So the three of you are being charged with a violation of statute 18 USC, section 3 71, conspiring to commit an offense against the United States and acting as an agent of a foreign government and foreign officials to wit the Russian Federation without prior notification to the Attorney General as required by law in violation of 18 USC 9 51 A. With that as the technical description of what you all are charged with, what does that mean and what is the basis of these baseless charges? Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:04:00): I think it's a really important question because what the government is doing is using some facts to obscure truth, to hide truth. The fact is, I did not register with the United States government as a foreign agent. That's a fact. But the truth is I'm not a foreign agent, never have been one, and I've always only worked for African people. They said that we ran candidates for office in 2017 and 2019 because the Russians wanted us to do that and paid for it. It's a fact we ran candidates for city council and mayor in St. Petersburg, Florida in 2017 and 2019. But the truth is the Russians did not pay for this. The Russians was not the idea of Russians, and we've been involved in Micropolitics and have been teaching other Africans how to be involved in Micropolitics for decades. They used the fact that we participated in a tour that was actually hosted by Fran fan's daughter throughout the United States, a committee of the United Nations checking on the conditions of African people, and we collected petitions on the question of genocide and fact. (00:05:29): We did go on that tour, we called it a winter tour, went to Jackson, Mississippi, Washington DC I think New York, and one or two other, Chicago, Illinois. That's a fact. We did those things. But the truth is that we did not do this for Russia. We did it because we wanted the United Nations to deal with this issue of genocide and reparations for African people in this country. So what they've done is take these facts and then construct a false conclusion for people, and it's extremely dangerous. And they do this at the expense of First Amendment because everything they've charged us with has to do with us speaking with us utilizing the Bill of Rights or utilizing the First Amendment that you just mentioned in the opening of this show. But they cannot say that we are attacking them because they use speech. They cannot say they're attacking us because just because we ran for office, which is something that we are supposed to have a constitutional right to do, it says not because they spoke. (00:06:35): It's because they spoke because the Russians wanted them to speak. The Russians wanted them to sow discord. The Russians wanted them to run for office in St. Petersburg, Florida as a stepping stone to somehow Russian interfering in the election, the national elections in this country. So that's dangerous because that means that anybody, oh, and it's a fact that I went to Moscow in May and September of 2015 at the invitation of a non-governmental organization, anti-global movement of Russia to participate in discussions with other people around democratic rights and around self-determination for peoples from various places around the world. So those are facts. I did that, but it is a lie that I was a Russian agent and I did it in the service of Russia. I did it because Zuckerberg and because the New York Times and because the Washington Post and because the Democratic Party and various other entities refuse to give access to black people so that we can speak independently about what our situation is. And you got to remember what was happening in 2014, 2015 with Mike Brown uprising because of the police murder of that young man in August of 2014, I think it was because of all kinds of police murder right before that one, the brother who was choked to death in New York, just all kinds of things were happening and the story of our people from our own initiatives could not be heard. And so I wanted to be heard, and I've been struggling for our story to be heard all around the world for the longest period of time. Wilmer Leon (00:08:35): Well, everybody knows that if you are planning to conspire against the government, if you're planning to bring down the American empire, the City Council of St. Petersburg, Florida is where you're going to start. That's the underbelly. That's the soft spot. That's the weak link in the American Empire is St. Petersburg, Florida. So I can see where the government would get the idea that, oh my gosh, the City Council of Florida and then the world, you mentioned that when you said you were brought to Moscow on behalf of an NGO, A non-government organization that made me think about the myON coup in Ukraine and Samantha Power and the NGOs that the United States has used to overthrow the democratically elected government in Ukraine. How the United States has been trying to overthrow Venezuela through NGOs. (00:09:48): They've got a playbook as it relates to non-governmental organizations. They've got a playbook and they understand very clearly how that game gets played. So that's one of the hypocrisies that immediately jumps out at me. And another one is they, they're claiming or they're charging you with running people for elected office. When apac, it was published in the New York Times back in April, that APAC came out and said they are committing 100 million to the 2024 election to unseat democratically elected officials who they deemed to be operating against the interests of Israel. And Jamal Bowman has been a victim of that. And Co Bush became a fell victim to that in Kansas City. Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:10:48): She's from St. Louis, Missouri. So Wilmer Leon (00:10:50): St. Louis, thank you. Thank you. I get my Kansas City and my St. Louis mixed up. I got you. Yeah, in St. Louis. So here we have APAC operating on or for the interests of the Zionist government of Israel saying publicly we're spending a hundred million, I think they spent 7 million to 1C Bowman. So there seems to be some inconsistency if not in the rule of law, at least in the practical applications here. Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:11:22): Yeah, and that's true. I mean, especially APAC is a splendid example, and it doesn't have to register as the people who accept that money as foreign agents. They don't have to register anything like that. And tremendous amounts of money, as you said, are involved in that. And there are corporations who do the same thing who work for foreign governments and it's well known and they haven't had to file as foreign agents. And the thing is that they claim that our movement took, I think they said either $6,000 over seven years or $7,000 from the Russians over six years. And they have taken, you talk about how they use facts to obscure truth because we do forums and we do events online and people make contributions to us online. And the A GM, the Russian anti-globalization movement may have made some contribution to us online, but you're talking about they say that over six years or seven years, we got something like $6,000 from that movement. (00:12:52): But even if we had, it would not have been illegal. But the point is that we raised $6,000 in a few hours. We raised 300 and some odd thousand dollars just to defend ourselves in this case that we are involved in. So they would take this poultry sum of money compared to the millions and billions of dollars that come from groups like APAC and from other kinds of, and from corporations funnel into this country and to employ people, corporations from other places around the world. And so this is just a fabrication, and they play upon the ignorance of people. They say, for example, there are someplace in this indictment, they said that we went to Moscow in 2015 or 16 and with all expense paid trip, this gives some impression of some great luxury that we, what was afforded to us. And by all expense, they mean that they paid for the air flight there. (00:14:05): They paid for where we stayed and for food. Now, I've gone on events, I've gone to international events sponsored by NGO, close to the government of Spain, and they spent a lot of money. They spent money to bring me there and two other people, one of whom was from England into Spain, they paid us, paid me for coming as well. But they would take this thing with Russia because the plot there is they've done so much work demonizing Russia saying Russia is the key. That's why Donald Trump, they say, Hillary Clinton didn't lose the election. Trump the Russians won the election. This is the kind of stuff that they're feeding the public. And so it doesn't matter. That's why it's so important for us to have this kind of discussion because they don't want this kind of stuff to get out even in a courtroom. They will place restrictions on what we can talk about in the courtroom. And that's why it's important for us to recognize that the trial has already begun. And this is some of the testimony that we are involved in at this very moment. Wilmer Leon (00:15:14): From what I understand, you have gone and spoken and gone to conferences in Ireland, in France, in England, in Spain, but all of those countries are European countries. And so long as Europe is paying the tab, then everything's fine. I've gone to Iran twice, similar types of programs, been brought to peace conferences and human rights conferences in Iran, and they pay my airfare, they pay my hotel bill, they pay my meals while I'm there. That's standard operating procedure. Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:15:58): But you're talking to them and Wilmer Leon (00:15:59): They give you an honorarium. Many of them will give you Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:16:02): An honor, but we didn't even get an honorarium from Russia. But you think about this, you're talking to a jury that many of whom never even leave the United States, don't have an understanding of how this stuff is. And so that sounds like some real esoteric can thing to people, local people here in the Tampa Bay area or in this district where they intend to put us on trial, they intend to lynch us. Wilmer Leon (00:16:31): In fact, I don't know the events that you attended, but when I went to Iran, I was there for the first trip. I was there for 10 days, and not only did I participate in this human rights conference, I lectured at 13 universities throughout the country. I was in constant motion. It was not a vacation. In fact, I even got to spend two hours with former President Deja while I was in Iran. But I'm saying that traveled all over the country by car, by plane, man. It wasn't easy work. The honorarium, for as much as I appreciated receiving it, if you broke it down to an hourly rate, no. When I say it wasn't worth my time, I don't mean that it wasn't worth my time. I mean, it didn't equate to a decent hourly rate. So Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:17:37): I just thought it was really important and I think it is important. And every time I get an opportunity to tell the world about the conditions of African people in this country, I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. I'm going to say even when you are involved with the United States to other countries, because it's designated almost the entire world, its enemy. And I'm saying that the United States accuses other countries of these egregious kind of things that you have to hold the mirror up to the United States and force it to look at the treatment of African people, forced it to look at the situation that they've had. Mexicans in cages at the southern border forced it to look at the fact that 2024, now you've got a situation where there are concentration camps just like Gaza, so to speak, that they refer to as Indian reservations. (00:18:30): This is the reality of the United States. And I want people to be able to recognize that the condition of African people are similar and that we want support. I've told them we are not looking for pity. We are not looking for charity. We want solidarity in the struggle that we are involved in. We believe that we have the right to be a self-determining people, and we believe that there's nothing in the Constitution of the United States that should prohibit us from saying that we have that right. Even if we say it in Russia, even if we say it in places like Venezuela or in Nicaragua where I have been, or Ireland, as you mentioned, we have the right to be able to say that by the Constitution. So either you got to burn it up, tear the Constitution up, and this is the conundrum that they have. And as you know that since they've attacked us, we've seen charges all across the board on so many people. Similarly charged being agents for foreign government, Scott Riter, et cetera. Yes, Scott Ritter just the other day, Wilmer Leon (00:19:37): Scott. Scott Ritter is a friend of mine, and I just had Scott Ritter on another show that I do. And the FBI just raided his house last week, took his computers in talking to Scott, what they really seemed to be after in his case, because he was a weapons inspectors and he had all the evidence that proved there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iran. They took that trove of evidence from him and we'll have to wait and see. And his point was because they want to rewrite the historic record and they want to, no, I'm not going to put words that he didn't use. They want to rewrite the historic record and they want to cleanse the record of the information that he possesses. Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:20:30): Yes. And of course we see Assange just getting out of prison right now for, I've forgotten how many years he was locked up, Wilmer Leon (00:20:39): His Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:20:40): Speech, it's Freedom of Press, some of the charges against us attack assaults on free press. They had chat us because we did an interview on burning spear.org. That's our newspaper, that's the.org. We did an interview with the Russian saying that the people have a right to know the position that's coming from Russia. We, Zuckerberg, Facebook, everything had blocked anything that people were trying to talk about that represent the position that might be coming from Russia just like they do now about Palestine. And so we did an interview, and so they said that was evidence of the fact that we worked for the Russians. So I mean, this is the kind of stuff that they've done, but it's a real treacherous situation because they're at a place where they say that if you have a position that is the same position of another government, another country, and what have you, then they can charge you with working as an accomplice of that government in some crime that they claim that government is creating. And that's a dangerous kind of thing. I mean, you talked about your trips and stuff to Iran, and that's especially true when you look at Iran because they've identified Russia, Iran, Venezuela, Wilmer Leon (00:22:01): China, Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:22:02): China, Korea as these enemies that they're contending with and they don't want anybody to know a truth that's independent of what it is that they have to say. Wilmer Leon (00:22:15): And when you peel back the layers of the onions, whether you're talking about Russia, talking about China, talking about Venezuela, Iran, what we're dealing with is anti imperialism. What we're dealing with is what's really at the crux of this issue. It's not communism, it's not socialism, it's not any other kind, ofm, anti-fascism, colonialism and anti imperialism at the crux, because that's what the empire sees as being the greatest threat. Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:23:02): It is the question. And from our analysis, the whole emergence of the Soviet Union, things like that came about as a consequence of the Communist Party. The Bolsheviks at that time refusing to participate with the rest of the colonial powers in the world in that first imperialist world war to redivide the world. And that was a world that was an extreme crisis for the whole social system. That's the timeframe. You look at this 1917 being the Russian Revolution, you're looking at the time of World War I, as they call it, a timeframe that saw a struggle even happening throughout this country bombing of Tulsa, Oklahoma. People everywhere resisting this colonial domination and Russia became a serious factor because unlike the rest of the colonial powers, Russia refused to participate in that world war, to Redivide the world. And that turned all of them against Russia too. So the Russian revolution happens in 1917, and by the way, much of some of the law that we have been victimized has its origin in that timeframe as well. Russian Revolution in 19 17, 19 18, all the colonial powers, including the United States and Japan invade Russia. They invaded Russia to crush it. And that struggle that they talk about with Ukraine and what have you, some people are able to see a beginning in like 2014 when the Wilmer Leon (00:24:47): Maidan coup Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:24:49): Maidan coup. But I'm saying even Wilmer Leon (00:24:50): Before, thank you, Samantha Power. Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:24:52): Yeah, but even before that, they've been dealing with Russia going back, like I said, a more than a hundred years. And even the NATO that they use in Ukraine and NATO that they use to kill Gaddafi, this NATO has its origin. It was created for the purpose of containing a crushing Russia. So this is not a new phenomenon. This is something that's been going on for a long time because they saw at one time Russia being aligned with the colonized peoples of the world and with the working peoples of the world. And this was a system that could not tolerate that and could not tolerate it spreading globally. Wilmer Leon (00:25:40): In fact, if you fast forward to the late fifties and the sixties, and you look at the anti-colonial movements in a number of African countries such as South Africa, such as Angola, which you find is the Soviet Union was involved in providing funding, training weapons to freedom fighters, supporting anti imperialist, anti colonial movements in those countries leading to the freedom of a number of those countries along with Cuba and some others. So people really need to understand the broader, they need to connect the dots here and so that they can understand the broader, in fact, historic context in which these events take place. People need to ask themselves, where is Patrice Lumumba University folks who was Patrice Lumumba? Where is Patrice Lumumba University? It's not in Nigeria, it's not in Swaziland, it's in Moscow. Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:26:49): And I spoke at Patrice Lamu before an organization of migrants that were located in Russia. That was one of the things I spoke for. And I think it's really important to say that they intend to provide some kind of Russia expert who will testify that Russia has a history of creating foils, creating forces like our party and our movement to undermine the United States and undermine Western powers, et cetera. And they will use the kind of stuff that you're talking about as evidence of complicity of Russia in being in control of us, because Russia did support the struggle in Angola and various other places and trained and funded and supported. Then they go back all the way to that to show that there's this historical trend coming from Russia, even though it was the Bolsheviks that they're talking about, that was for the purpose of corrupting, undermining the United States and the Western powers, the democracies. (00:28:04): They would show that that's the typical thing that we are typical of dupes of Russia, if not dupes cooperatives of Russia based on the stuff that you just mentioned, which you and I think is right on you, and I think is glorious. I mean, that puts them in a situation. Have they saying Mandela, who they love, he is the Negro. They love that. Mandela took support from the Soviet Union and was refused along with other African countries to condemn Russia around the Ukrainian question precisely because of the history of Russia as it relates to people who are struggling for freedom. Wilmer Leon (00:28:45): And the Palestinian question as well Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:28:47): Palestinian Question, Wilmer Leon (00:28:49): Nelson Mandela was very clear that as he was fighting for the rights of South Africans, he was on record as saying, even when we win this struggle, we will not have completed our mission until the Palestinians are free. Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:29:08): Yes, yes. Wilmer Leon (00:29:09): So in fact, a lot of people don't know the first person, the first head of state that Mandela went to see when he was released from Roobben Island was Fidel Castro. A lot of folks don't know that history, but in fact, Mandela said, and I'll paraphrase, your enemy is not my enemy, and I am not going to allow you to select who my friends and who my enemies are. Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:29:37): Sure, sure, sure. That's the thing. 60 years ago, African people in this country initiated the freedom summer in Mississippi, and we dealt with the freedom summer in 1964. It was revolving around just democratic rights for black people been murdered, especially in Mississippi, which was the headquarters of much of the terror being murdered, African people being denied access to the ballot just as what's happening with us as quiet as Kept, I fought for the Civil Rights Bill, I fought for the Voting Rights Act, and now I'm being charged because of participating independently in the electoral process. But 60 years ago, freedom Summer student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee was the key force in creating the freedom Summer. And people came from all around the country into Mississippi, a lot of white people came, and this was something that SNCC did deliberately in part because they knew that if white people came the ruling class media that was no longer paying attention to the Civil Rights movement, just as they don't in this movement, if white people came, then the media would come with them because some of them children of media owners and big shot white people, and also the white people who came would face some of the same threats that Africans were facing in Mississippi. (00:31:06): And as you know, on the first day of Freedom Summer 1964 and Mississippi, three people died, two of whom were white. Wilmer Leon (00:31:15): Goodman and Cheney. Right. Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:31:19): And that brought a lot of attention to it. But off of that movement in 1964, that 1964 that pushed the Civil Rights Act, that pushed them to have to in 1965 passed the voting rights legislation. But 1965 is also the year to kill Malcolm X, so that even though now you can vote that they're doing things to eliminate what you would vote for, they killed Malcolm X 1968. They killed Martin Luther King, 1969. The war against the Black Panther Party was clear to everybody around the whole world that you had the head of the FBI declaring that the Black Panther Party represented the greatest threat to the internal security of this country. They arrested 21 members of the Black Panther Party on a conspiracy charge in New York on a more than a hundred charges, including threats to blow up the flowers in the botanical garden, that thing that lasted for two years, and they beat every one of the charges, and they were ridiculous charges in the first place. (00:32:22): But you had this period. So what we've done is we are now engaged in the Freedom Summer, summer Project, freedom Summer in St. Petersburg, Florida, which is right across the bridge from Tampa, Florida, where the court that we will be going to is located and we are inviting everybody. We've already begun. We're going door to door, talking to people, educating the people in the community about this case and about other things that's happening in the world. We are having forums and discussions of people are doing street corner stuff with banners, et cetera. We are calling people to come in the same Peterburg Florida now. And then of course, on August 31st, we have a massive mobilization that's going to be happening where people again will be coming from. We've got commitments for participation from Cornell West, from Jill Stein, from Charles Barron, from just a host of other people. Everybody's going to be in St. Petersburg, Florida for Freedom Summer. And the Freedom Summer is going to have similar consequences from this, that the freedom summer of 1964 had that gave rise to the civil rights bill, that gave rights rise to the Voting Rights Act. That gave rise to the Black Power Movement in 1966. All of these things came out of that. And we are rebuilding a whole movement, but with this attack on us, we are reestablishing the legitimacy of the entire struggle against colonialism and against imperialism. Wilmer Leon (00:33:52): We're talking about the First Amendment, we're talking about the right of freedom of speech. And there's a whole campaign, as you've mentioned Zuckerberg a couple of times, and there's a whole campaign against social media access and freedom of speech on social media. The United States government is using Zuckerberg, they're using some of the others to assist them in platforming people. And what this really comes down to is the power of the narrative, whose story is going to be told Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:34:32): That's Wilmer Leon (00:34:32): It, and by whom? Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:34:34): That's it! Wilmer Leon (00:34:35):  So it's not so much that what you are advocating is seditious. No. The problem the government has is the narrative you are telling, the facts that you are providing is counter to that narrative, and then that threatens the empire. Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:34:58): Yes. Yes. That is the truth. And I'm reminded of this movie, I forgot the name of it, but you had these two characters. Tom Cruise I think played some kind of lawyer and Jack Nicholson and Oh, you Wilmer Leon (00:35:14): Can't handle the truth. Yeah, I Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:35:16): Want the truth. I want the truth Say you can't handle the truth. That's essentially the case with the United States. Now, Wilmer Leon (00:35:24): Let me quickly jump in, because there's a reason that your narrative about Ukraine and my narrative about Ukraine and Russia's narrative about Ukraine are basically the same because we're telling the truth, the truth. And all you have to do is Google what we say about it. Google the Maidan coup Google. Now I'm drawing a blank on the agreement that they reached the Minsk courts. Yes, Google the Minsk courts, Google the Midon coup. Go back and look at when Joe Biden met with Vladimir Putin in Geneva, Switzerland, and Putin told Biden, I'm giving you my security demands in writing. That's, and I expect your response in writing. And Joe Biden ignored him. You can Google Secretary of State Baker meeting with Gorbachev and promising Gorbachev, NATO will, if you agree to the reunification of Eastern West Germany, I guarantee you NATO will not move any further eastward towards Russia, towards the Soviet Union. That's all fact. Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:36:43): Yes. But fact, you can't handle fact. You see, because what they've done, first of all, just think about who controls the narrative. I've seen Kamala Harris, she is just thrown this thing out about, the slogan is We won't go back. Now, that's our slogan. Not one step backwards, not one. That's no retreat. Wilmer Leon (00:37:08): No retreat. Not one Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:37:10): Step back, not one step backwards. So what happens is Zuckerberg won't let anybody hear what I got to say. I go on Facebook or on social media, and there are fewer people who see me than there are members of one of our local organizations. They won't let that happen. But so Kamala takes this because it resonates, because it speaks to the reality of black people who say, we won't go back. We're not going backwards, not going to let you push us back in the back of the bus. We're not going to do any buck dancing and shuffling and this kind of stuff. Not one step backwards, right. That's our position. And so now Kamala, because it resonates with black people, Zuckerberg won't let the people hear that from us. So Kamala comes forward, we won't go back. This is a part of the process that they're trying to solve a particular problem of the Democratic party to reenergize it among African people, many of whom are even going to the Republican party and Trump and others was just discussing not going to vote at all. So that's the controlling of the narrative, how that narrative gets out. That's a critical question. And that's the question of free speech as well. And that's why it's so important again, that we are having this discussion now. Wilmer Leon (00:38:24): In fact, there's another slogan that if folks knew the true origins of it, it would have an impact on the narrative that is from the river to the sea, from the sea that is now being described, or it is being used as this racist trope by Palestinians who are using it to say they want to cleanse historic Palestine of Jews. No, actually, folks, and look it up, because it's fact. That was the Zionist slogan. Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:39:04): It was Wilmer Leon (00:39:05): Back in the thirties. Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:39:06): It was, they wanted it all. That's what they were saying. They wanted it all from Wilmer Leon (00:39:10): The river to the sea, Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:39:11): From the river to the sea. Wilmer Leon (00:39:13): And what they don't tell you about the slogan now is what do the Palestinians say from the river to the sea? Palestine will be free. They're talking about democracy. Yes. They're talking about one person, one vote. Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:39:31): They're Wilmer Leon (00:39:32): Not talking about genocide and removing people from their homes, killing their olive trees Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:39:39): And taking come back home. They're saying, let the people come back home. Because the truth of the matter is, the way they've distorted this whole history is that in Palestine, there were Jews, there were Muslims, there were Christians all living together in Palestine. And now you have this situation where the settlers brought in by the imperialist Palestine. You can go back to Balfour Declaration in 1917, I think it was. You can go back to the agreement that was made, that SS Wilmer Leon (00:40:21): Pico agreement. Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:40:21): Yeah. That created the borders that now Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon, white people did that and for their own benefit, et cetera. And then they act like they're surprised because there's chaos happening in those circumstances. So they've distorted this history, and it's all right for them to put lyrics in a song called From Sea to Shining Sea, which was a decoration that all of this land of indigenous people, they wanted all of it. It's not like they brought a million people here when they came. There's just a handful. But they set out to take every square inch from sea to shining sea. And we say from sea to shining sea, the indigenous people will be free and from the river to the sea, Palestine should be free. But history is something else. You can't make it go away just because you don't like it Wilmer Leon (00:41:21): As much as they're trying and they're doing as Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:41:22): Much as they're trying. Wilmer Leon (00:41:24): And again, I have to go back to this whole idea because one of the things that I have found in reading history is that the United States, when the United States finds itself in conflict, that's when the government becomes very sensitive about what's being said and who's saying it, and when it's being said. So you can go back to World War, and you touched on this, you can go back to World War. And that's when we first started seeing anti sedition laws when the United States was involved in World War I and was very fearful about losing the war. Then the United States was very concerned about people speaking out against what the government considered to be their interest. And then after those forces were vanquished and the dust started to settle, well, then things started to relax and folks started saying, well, and then we had the same problem in World War ii, and then after the threats were vanquished, then you could just about say anything. So with the attacks on you, with the attacks on Scott Ritter with the attacks on others, is that a signal to you that the United States is scared? Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:42:46): It is a signal that the rulers of this country experience a very fragile situation. It is not like they control the world the way they used to. It is not like they can tell people to shut up and people would do what they say. They couldn't get even stooges in Africa to come out and support their position on Ukraine. They can't get people who they consider backwaters in their backyard, who they've characterized as Banana Republics in the past to just do what it is that they want them to do. They can't control Nicaragua, and they've tried and they can't control Venezuela, and they're even up to this point, they can't control the Palestinian people who are resisting. And so it's a very fragile situation because it's a situation that rests upon a colonial motor production where the entire process of human beings engaged in production in the world today is on a foundation of parasitic foundation of colonialism. And so it is a very tenuous situation for them. And I'm reminded of this statement by George Orwell in the book 1984, when he says, who controls the past controls the future, and who controls the present controls the past, the past, and this is where they found themselves in a really shaky foundation of controlling the past. Wilmer Leon (00:44:11): That's why they go after Scott Ritter because he has the historic documents. Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:44:16): Yes. And that's why they're attacking us, right? They don't want history to start in 2014 when they say that somehow I became a stooge of Russia. That's where they want history to start. They don't want history to start with a murder of black people that would have incentivized us to take the kind of political stance that we take. They want to say the history of our party over the last 50 or more years. And our position consistent around genocide, around reparations, around, and actually I developed, excuse me, a pamphlet tactics and strategy that included looking for allies around the world and the struggle against colonialism, but that they don't want to talk about. So from their perspective, they're trying to control the past in that courtroom. They want to control the past. They've even moved that they want to deny us the right to use the First Amendment as a defense. Do you hear what I just said? Wilmer Leon (00:45:19): Say it again. Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:45:20): Yeah. They want to deny us the right to use the First Amendment as a defense in court. Wilmer Leon (00:45:29): And that centers around, I haven't studied that point, but I believe it's because they know on that point, they lose they. So what they're saying is it's not a matter of, you don't have the right to say what you've said. It's that we don't like what you're saying, Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:45:54): But that's the real deal. But the way they cloth that, the way they try to hide their hand, and I think it's so shallow, it's so weak, is they say, well, hell, Wilmer Leon (00:46:03): If I figured it out, it ain't that deep. Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:46:08): Oh, that's funny. What they're saying is that we are not attacking them because they said something. We are attacking them because they said it because the Russians told 'em to say it. So they liquidate, they try to liquidate the free speech question by turning speech into an act. Do you see Wilmer Leon (00:46:27): As a foreign agent? Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:46:29): Yes, yes, yes. And it's ridiculous. Wilmer Leon (00:46:34): I want to be sure I don't forget this point. To your point about erasing history, another example of that is Hamas' attack on October 7th. The 99% of the narrative is this conflict started on October 7th, ignoring the Nakba in 1947. That has absolutely nothing to do with this and the over 50 years of genocide, oppression, and war crimes. Oh, no, forget that. That had nothing to do with October 7th. That's another example of what you It is. Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:47:14): It's an example. And the fact is, one thing we know is that there are people who don't know me, don't know the African people Associates party, the who, the movement. And they hear us say something and then they hear the United States government say something. Sometimes they might have some struggles in trying to understand who might be telling the truth. The fact is that the oppressed must have truth because we cannot win freedom without truth. The oppressor cannot have truth because they can't have slavery where truth is involved. And so this is the thing that you start off knowing that those people who oppress, and there's no way you can deny the historical oppression of African people unless you control the courtrooms like they do now you have guns that can wake people up at five o'clock in the morning or with flash bank grenades and things like that. (00:48:16): The fact is that there are certain things that cannot be controlled, cannot be denied in terms of the history of oppression of African people in this country. And what they would do, of course, is they would use examples like Obama and Kamala Harris because they want to contain the struggle around racism. And you say, well, racism doesn't exist anymore. Not as bad because we elected a black president, or we are getting ready to select another Negro president, Negro Indian president. But it's not about race as such except to the extent that race represents and identifies a colonial population. The fact is we suffer from colonialism. So you can have black people who represent the colonial empire, just like you've had that African people, Mobutu and all over Africa and other puppets like that, and Africa, Wilmer Leon (00:49:08): William Ruto in Kenya being bought off to help the United States invade Haiti. Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:49:14): That's right. That's right. And so that's what they've been able to do. And that's why the colonial question, understanding that colonialism is so important, and not colonialism just as a policy, but as a mode of production that came into existence with the first time in human history where there was a single world economy. And that world economy was something that was initiated by Portugal's attack on Africa in something like 14, 15. And then started the dispersal of African people and others who in what is now Europe, jumped in and participated in this process. That's where you got the So-called America from, that's where you've got Brazil, that's where you've got all of these territories throughout the So-called South America as a consequence of that initial attack and the world economy that was knit together for the first time in history, that that is not just a policy of a particular government as it may have been when Portugal started, as it may have been when some other countries started. (00:50:20): But now it's the basis of the whole world economy. It is a colonial mode of production. And to the extent that we understand this and really get a hold of that, we don't have to have somebody, Russians or somebody tell us what to do. We know that when colonialism tries to exert itself or when people are fighting against colonialism, it's part of a common struggle. And so I had never met Nicaraguan in my life when the Nicaraguan revolutions heated up and we organized in San Francisco Bay area, we organized the first mass meeting solidarity with Nicaragua people because we understood that was our struggle too. And we built the whole movement in support of Nicaragua because it is one mode of production. The colonialism is the thing that n this whole process together where you have colonizers and colonized and the vast majority of the people in the world experience the negatives of colonialism through this colonial motor production. It's only a handful of people. And that's something that's not widely understood either. Only a minority of the population benefits from this economic system that they've created on the backs of African and colonized people around the world. Wilmer Leon (00:51:42): And as you talk about Nicaragua, about three weeks ago, Chiquita Brands was found guilty in a Florida court of funding death squads in Columbia, and they were held to have, now they have to pay millions and millions and millions of dollars to the survivors. I just use that as another example of the colonialism that you're talking about. And that whole story right there could take us into another hour about immigration because the question that's not being asked in this political context about border protection and immigration, they keep talking about what are we going to do with all of these people that are at our border? But they don't ask why are the people coming in the first place? And so again, because we could talk about Haiti, why are there Haitians at the border in Texas and Mexico, California, and because the United States is decimating the Haitian economy, why are these people coming from Guatemala, Honduras, all over central and South America? Because the United States has decimated their economies and the people have no other choice? Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:53:13): That's true. And I think even a related truth is the fact that when people talk about immigrants, sometimes they like to call America just a nation of immigrants. The melting pot, they call it the nation of immigrants. And we say, first of all, America's not a nation. It's a prison of nations. And that black people are not immigrants. We are captives. That's how we came here as captives. Now we are the only people other than the indigenous people who did not come here looking for a better way of life, but lost a better way of life as the consequences having been brought here. When you look at all the places where Europeans have gone to running from poverty, running from disease, running from despotism, from monarchy, and a feudal system, they came here, they came to the Americas, they came all these other places. They occupy New Zealand, Australia and things like that. (00:54:08): So when you look at immigrants, when you look at immigrants, and when they say that America's a nation of immigrants, what they're talking about is them. They are the ones who are immigrants. And why the hell did they come? They were running from chara, and this is the origin of the First Amendment and the Bill of Rights because they faced tyranny in the divine right of kings. They had no rights. So they came here to this land, and then they initiated laws and things like that to protect them from tyranny. But they won the freedom to oppress because when they were doing this, African people were enslaved. The Bill of Rights, the First Amendment was ratified by the United States Congress in 1791. 1791. African people were under the whip, under being enslaved, beaten and raped and stuff legally. So it wasn't for us. And this is something I'm trying to help white people understand that what they do is they will pick someone that they have made extremely unpopular. (00:55:18): When they want to attack a basic and fundamental right, they would pick someone they think they've made extremely unpopular, and they will use them as the means to attack that, right? They can't attack my right to free speech in many ways because I never had it look at people like Emmett Till, who they butchered because they said that he whistled at a white woman. And the fact is that black people learn how to shuffle and hold their heads down and not look up and not say anything that white people would find offensive. And this has been the history. So when they come at the Bill of Rights, when they come at the First Amendment as quiet as it's kept, they're simply using us as the means by which they can attack the First Amendment, the Bill of Rights, the constitutional democratic rights of everybody in this country, including white people. And we see evidence of that. You talk about Scott Riter, you talk about all these other people who they're attacking now, not in total disregard of what the Constitution is supposed to be about. Wilmer Leon (00:56:21): Hands off uru.org, hands off uru.org. What do you want, folks? And before I ask that question, lemme say this to those of you who are watching this that are just saying, oh, these guys, these guys are tripping. These guys are drunk. Look, folks, just research we're talking about, that's all you got to do. You can either summarily dismiss us or again, look up the Maidan Coup, look up the mens courts. Look up Chiquita brands being found guilty in a Florida court for sponsoring Death squads in Columbia. Look it up. And what you'll find is we're confusing you with the facts. That's what we're doing. So chairman, yes, Ella, what do you want my audience to do as it relates to the Uhuru 3? Chairman Omali Yeshitela (00:57:19): Well, one thing I want the audience to do is to understand that we are not guilty of anything they've charged us of. They've used the facts, as I mentioned earlier, that I went to Moscow, that we ran people for office, et cetera. And they've used these facts to obscure the truth and the truth that we didn't do what they said to do. Our lawyers though, for the sake of court argument, says that even if we did it, it's protected by the Constitution. So that's one thing I think is really important. And the other thing is that we are transparent. You don't engage in some kind of conspiracy to overthrow disabuse the government in public. Everything that we talk about, it's in our newspaper. They don't have to use flash bang grenades, bust down doors and stuff like that. Get a copy of the newspaper. It only costs a dollar. (00:58:13): Go to our websites. Everything is spelled out. The books that we were printed, all of it's in the books that we've written. So people should go to Hands Off Hurro, that's HandsOffUhuru.org. HandsOffUhuru.org. We want you to read the indictment. We want you to see it. We want you to see our response to that indictment. We want you to see their response to our response, read it. And because we believe that if people know the truth and the court is aware that people are aware of the truth, et cetera, it makes, it enhances the ability of the court to go by the law, which is what we want them to do, because they are using the law to pursue a political objective, destroying our movement, destroying the struggle of African people to win freedom and to take away basic rights from other people. (00:59:06): So we want you to read the indictments and the political, the court documents that's associated with that. We want you to come to St. Peterburg Florida. Come now, come anytime and stay as long as you can because we are going to be doing this work moving toward a massive event on August 31st, and then from August 31st, which is the weekend before the trial in Tampa, right across the bridge on the September 3rd, there's a trial. And we want you to be at that trial. So come and organize on the ground, come to Summer to the summer project that we've initiated here, the Freedom Summer in St. Petersburg, Florida, where we'll be educating people, organizing, doing forums, doing door-to-Door work, doing political education the whole bit. And that's what we are looking for. And we say HandsOffUhuru.org. And we really appreciate all the support that the people have given. And you comment Wilman, thank you so very much as well. Wilmer Leon (01:00:11): It is Chairman Omali Yeshitela (01:00:12): Melody. Wilmer Leon (01:00:14): Melody Graves. As always, without her, you and I would just be sitting here talking to ourselves. Chairman Omali Yeshitela (01:00:20): I got it. Wilmer Leon (01:00:22): Chairman brother Omai Yeshitela, thank you so much for joining me today. Chairman Omali Yeshitela (01:00:27): Thank you. I really appreciate being here, and I want to thank your audience. It is just splendid to be here with you. Thank you so much. Wilmer Leon (01:00:33): And folks, as Chairman Omali Yeshitela just said, thank you all so much for listening to the Connecting the Dots podcast with me, Dr. Wimer Leon, stay tuned. There are new episodes every week. Also, please follow and subscribe. Leave a review, share the show, and follow us on social media. You can find all the links below in the show description. That Patreon page is very, very important because your contributions help and enable us to do the work that we do here. And remember, this is where the analysis of politics, culture, and history converge. Because talk without analysis is just chatter, and we don't chatter here on connecting the dots. See you all again next time. Until then, I'm Dr. Wier Leon Uru. Have a good one. Peace. We're out Announcer (01:01:31): Connecting the dots with Dr. Wilmer Leon, where the analysis of politics, culture, and history converge.

www.commsolutionsmn.com-  What is going on with the Biden campaign? They scheduled their convention so late, that if anything unforseen happens, there will be no Democratic candidate on the ballot in Ohio. Will President Biden make it to the general election? Will Kamala Harris? This campaign is losing and losing bad. Obama can't see all of his work undone for a second time, especially with President coming in and promising to tear down everything these extreme liberals have done to tear down the United States and place it under globalist control. Speaking of which, the Democrat Party is backing these radical DA's that have caused increases in crime across the nation. The voters overwhelmingly don't like these policies and want the law enforced, yet they continue to vote for whoever the Democrat Party sends them. Why  would you keep voting for someone that hams you and refuses to listen? There has a push since the'50s to tear down masculinity in order to push up women. The feminist movement has done what they can to get people to look down on men, destroy masculine charachteristics, and make men more effeminite. Now, women deserve equal rights with men in all things, but we didn't need to destroy men to do it. It has had diasasterous effects on the family. Fatherlessness is at epidemic levels, and it is at the root of why we live in crazy town today. Women are moving further to the left, and men are starting to move further to the right. Women want a more conservative man, but the men don't want leftist women. This is a big problem in creating families in our society. The decline of faith in America is at the center of this issue. How do we put this back together? We discuss some ideas.

Full title: "Public Courage and the Academy: Beyond the Binaries: Depolarizing our Politics and Bridging Our World" The Rev. Dr. Deborah Johnson explored the theme of depolarizing our politics and bridging our world. She invited us to move beyond societal binaries and to embrace a more inclusive and compassionate future. Rev. Dr. Deborah Johnson (she/her) is a renowned spiritual leader and social justice activist known for her significant contributions to promoting universal spiritual principles and cultural diversity. As the founding minister of Inner Light Ministries, she has dedicated her life to teaching the practical application of Universal Spiritual Principles to all aspects of life. Additionally, she is the founder and president of The Motivational Institute, a consulting firm specializing in cultural diversity, serving a wide range of clients from Fortune 500 companies to community-based organizations. Dr. Johnson is recognized for her exceptional public speaking skills and her ability to bring clarity to complex and emotionally charged issues. Throughout her career, Dr. Johnson has been a prominent figure in the fight for social justice and equality. She played a pivotal role as a co-litigant in two landmark cases in California that set precedents for the inclusion of sexual orientation in the state's Civil Rights Bill and defeated the challenge to legalize domestic partnerships. Her focus on coalition building, conflict resolution, public policy development, and cultural sensitivity awareness has made her a powerful voice for compassion, equality, and reconciliation. Dr. Johnson holds a visionary perspective of Oneness, transcending creed and doctrine, and is particularly dedicated to bridging the gap between individuals with conservative and progressive ideologies. Public Courage and the Academy is a speaker series that explores the power religion plays in advancing social change. The series will feature nationally recognized leaders whose creative approaches toward a just world at peace have had national and global impact. This series is hosted by the Office of Ministry Studies at Harvard Divinity School in collaboration with Just Us, A Unity Campus Justice Ministry for change agents and peacemakers. Facilitated by Rev. Dr. Kevin Ross, MRPL ‘23, Senior Minister and CEO of Unity Sacramento. This event took place on February 29, 2024. For more information, see https://hds.harvard.edu A full transcript is forthcoming.

This Day in Legal History: Andrew Johnson is a Scoundrel On this day in legal history, March 27, 1866, President Andrew Johnson enacted one of the most consequential vetoes in American history. Johnson vetoed the Civil Rights Bill, a pivotal piece of legislation intended to extend full U.S. citizenship to all former slaves and to fundamentally reshape the landscape of civil rights in the aftermath of the Civil War. This bill was a direct response to the Black Codes, laws passed by Southern states that severely restricted the rights of newly freed African Americans.Johnson, a Southern Democrat who ascended to the presidency after Lincoln's assassination, argued that the bill encroached upon states' rights and would lead to federal overreach. His veto underscored a profound political and ideological rift between the President and the Radical Republicans in Congress, who advocated for more stringent Reconstruction policies and greater protections for former slaves.The veto of the Civil Rights Bill did not mark the end of the struggle for equality; rather, it galvanized Congress to action. In a rare and historic move, Congress overrode Johnson's veto in April 1866, marking the first time in U.S. history that a major piece of legislation became law over a presidential veto. This event signaled a shift in the balance of power between the executive and legislative branches and underscored the growing commitment of the federal government to civil rights.The passage of the Civil Rights Bill set the stage for the 14th Amendment, which would be ratified two years later in 1868. The amendment enshrined in the Constitution the principles of birthright citizenship and equal protection under the law, fundamentally transforming the nature of American citizenship and laying the groundwork for future civil rights advancements. Johnson's veto, and the legislative response it provoked, remain a testament to the turbulent and transformative nature of the Reconstruction era, highlighting the enduring struggle for justice and equality in the United States.The U.S. Justice Department strategically filed its significant antitrust lawsuit against Apple Inc. in New Jersey, aiming to leverage the Third Circuit Court's history of plaintiff-friendly rulings in monopoly cases. This move is part of the broader Biden administration effort to regulate the dominance of Big Tech through antitrust law, targeting practices Apple uses to maintain its smartphone market monopoly. The Third Circuit, known for its openness to cracking down on monopolistic behavior, contrasts with other circuits perceived as more defendant-friendly in antitrust matters.Legal experts point out the Third Circuit's precedents in supporting the government's stance against monopolistic practices, citing past rulings against companies like Dentsply and 3M Co. for violating the Sherman Act. These precedents underline the court's stricter standards for monopolists, relevant to the DOJ's allegations against Apple for Section 2 violations of the same act. The choice of New Jersey also reflects tactical considerations regarding subpoena power and the desire for a court that might approach the case with fresh eyes, avoiding circuits like the Ninth, where Apple has previously secured favorable rulings.The DOJ's lawsuit, joined by New Jersey and other states, underscores the strategic legal and geographic considerations at play in selecting a venue. This reflects a deliberate effort to position the case advantageously within the U.S. legal landscape, aiming for a fresh judicial examination of Apple's business practices and their impact on competition and consumers.DOJ's Apple Suit Filed in New Jersey for Friendly Third CircuitThe 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals has temporarily halted a Texas law, SB4, which authorizes state officials to arrest, detain, and deport individuals entering the U.S. illegally, pending an appeal. This decision represents a temporary victory for the Biden administration in a legal battle with significant ramifications for U.S. immigration policy. The court's 2-1 ruling maintains the suspension of the law, following a lower court judge's determination that it conflicts with federal immigration statutes.Chief Judge Priscilla Richman, writing for the court, underscored that immigration enforcement predominantly falls within federal jurisdiction, despite Texas' efforts to address what it perceives as a failure by Congress to fund adequate responses to increased illegal entries into the United States. She emphasized that Texas cannot assume the federal government's role in immigration matters according to the Constitution and laws.The contested law has caused considerable confusion and uncertainty in Texas, especially regarding its potential enforcement mechanisms. Texas officials argue that SB4 is necessary to mitigate the border crossing influx, criticizing federal inaction. Conversely, the Biden administration contends that the law unlawfully encroaches on federal authority to manage immigration policy and could hinder border management efforts.The appeals court noted that the Texas statute would likely disrupt the federal government's established processes for managing the removal of individuals in the country illegally, pointing out the federal system's complexity and national scope. The 5th Circuit is set to further review the state's appeal of a February ruling by US District Judge David Ezra, who blocked the law on grounds that it would effectively nullify federal law and authority. Oral arguments for the appeal are slated for April 3, as the broader legal challenge to SB4's enforceability continues, with the federal government, a Texas border county, and immigrant rights organizations seeking its permanent injunction.Texas Deportation Law Stays Blocked Until Appeal Is Resolved (1)Disney has settled a lawsuit with the state of Florida, marking the end of its dispute with Governor Ron DeSantis. This resolution came about after a board, appointed by DeSantis to manage the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District which oversees Disney's operations in the region, accepted Disney's settlement offer. The conflict, lasting nearly a year, stemmed from Disney's implementation of certain changes that diminished the municipal authority's powers, specifically limiting the new board's oversight on theme park expansions and billboard advertising.These changes were enacted just before the takeover by the DeSantis-appointed board, leading to a significant legal and public relations battle between the state and Disney, one of Florida's largest employers. Under the terms of the settlement, Disney has agreed to withdraw these controversial changes, thereby restoring the authority of the municipal board.Jeff Vahle, president of Walt Disney World Resort, expressed satisfaction with the settlement, highlighting that it not only concludes the ongoing litigation in Florida's state court but also initiates a period of positive engagement with the district's new leadership. He emphasized that this agreement facilitates further investments and job creation in Florida, benefiting both the state's economy and its workforce. This settlement represents a significant step towards resolving the tensions between Disney and the Florida government, opening the door to future cooperation and development.Disney Ends Fight With Ron DeSantis by Settling Florida LawsuitFlorida governor, Disney reach settlement | ReutersA consumer lawsuit accusing Apple of anti-competitive practices related to cryptocurrency transactions in its App Store was dismissed by a federal judge in San Francisco. The lawsuit, filed in November 2023, claimed Apple's restrictions on cryptocurrency technology stifled competition and increased transaction fees for services like Venmo and Cash App. U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria criticized the lawsuit as "speculative," identifying several critical flaws, but allowed the plaintiffs 21 days to amend their complaint. Apple, which has faced various antitrust challenges, including a notable lawsuit from the U.S. Justice Department over smartphone market monopolization, denied any wrongdoing. This dismissal adds to the ongoing debate about Apple's influence on app market competition and its regulatory compliance amidst growing legal scrutiny.Apple defeats consumers' crypto-payment antitrust case for now | ReutersHunter Biden is set to request the dismissal of tax evasion charges against him, claiming the case is politically motivated. His legal team will argue before a Los Angeles federal court that the prosecution was influenced by Republican scrutiny of his father, President Joe Biden. Hunter has pleaded not guilty to charges of evading $1.4 million in taxes from 2016 to 2019, despite having repaid the amount. His trial is scheduled for June, ahead of the contentious November presidential election. Additionally, Hunter faces separate charges in Delaware related to the alleged purchase of a handgun while using illegal drugs, to which he has also pleaded not guilty. His defense includes claims of selective prosecution and challenges the appointment of Special Counsel David Weiss, asserting the case should be dismissed due to an earlier plea deal that fell through.Hunter Biden to ask judge to dismiss tax charges as politically motivated | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

The Dean's List with Host Dean Bowen – The answer is quite simple. His life is not celebrated in government, media, or academia simply because he was not a Democrat. He was a Republican. During a debate of the 1871 Civil Rights Bill, which would allow the federal government to punish Klan violence, Rainey gave a powerful speech describing why the...

The beginning of the Civil Rights Movement is often dated to sometime in the middle of the 1950s, but the roots of it stretch back much further. The NAACP, which calls itself “the nation's largest and most widely recognized civil rights organization,” was founded near the beginning of the 20th Century, on February 12, 1909. As today's guest demonstrates, though, Black Americans were exercising civil rights far earlier than that, in many cases even before the Civil War.  Joining me in this episode is Dr. Dylan C. Penningroth is a professor of law and history and Associate Dean of the Program in Jurisprudence and Social Policy at the University of California–Berkeley and author of Before the Movement: The Hidden History of Black Civil Rights. Our theme song is Frogs Legs Rag, composed by James Scott and performed by Kevin MacLeod, licensed under Creative Commons. The mid-episode music is “Hopeful Piano,” by Oleg Kyrylkovv, available via the Pixabay license. The episode image is “Spectators and witnesses on second day of Superior Court during trial of automobile accident case during court week in Granville County Courthouse, Oxford, North Carolina,” by Marion Post Wolcott, photographed in 1939; the photograph is in the public domain and available via the Library of Congress Prints & Photographs Division, Farm Security Administration/Office of War Information Black-and-White Negatives. Additional Sources: “8 Key Laws That Advanced Civil Rights,” by Mehrunnisa Wani, History.com, January 26, 2022. “The Reconstruction Amendments: Official Documents as Social History,” by Eric Foner, The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History. “(1865) Reconstruction Amendments, 1865-1870,” BlackPast. “14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Civil Rights (1868),” U.S. National Archives. “March 27, 1866: Veto Message on Civil Rights Legislation,” Andrew Johnson, UVA Miller Center. “Andrew Johnson and the veto of the Civil Rights Bill,” National Park Service. “Grant signs KKK Act into law, April 20, 1871,” by Andrew Glass, Politico, April 20, 2019. “Looking back at the Ku Klux Klan Act,” by Nicholas Mosvick, National Constitution Center, April 20, 2021. “Reconstruction and Its Aftermath,” Library of Congress The African American Odyssey: A Quest for Full Citizenship. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Biden lying about how he talked Strom Thurmond into voting for for The Civil Rights Bill, Hurriicane Idalia is hitting Florida coast tomorrow, Trumps trial will happen on the Monday before super Tuesday and 69% of Democrats don't think Biden should run in 2024.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In the years prior to the passage of the federal Civil Rights Bill, the responsibility of offering higher education to Black students went to a few segregated universities. After the bill passed the doors were open and Black students were allowed to apply to any of the state's other universities. Still, though legally integrated, the once all Black universities maintained a mission providing, what some in the Black community was better social and educational environments. Consisting in Louisiana of the Southern University system (with campuses in New Orleans, Baton Rouge, Shreveport and a Baton Rouge law school); plus, under the separate University of Louisiana system Grambling University, each is a state-run facility. There are also two private universities, Dillard and Xavier, in New Orleans. All those schools are collectively referred to as HBCU, Historically Black Colleges and Universities. An extended exhibit at the Capitol Park Museum, a division of the Louisiana State Museum, has opened in Baton Rouge to tell the stories of the struggles and successes of the schools. Michael McKnight, Deputy Director of Louisiana State Museums, and Rodneyna Hart, the museum's director, join Louisiana Life Executive Editor Errol Laborde, along with podcast producer Kelly Massicot to talk about the history of the HBCU.

Former congressman David Price '61 joined Catalyze with scholar co-hosts Benny Klein '24 and Elias Guedira '26 in December 2022 during the politician's final month in office. Price, who retired this January, represented North Carolina's fourth district, including Orange County, Chapel Hill.The alumnus visited the Foundation to share about his lifetime career of public service and his over three decades serving in the U.S. House of Representatives. Price also spoke about his involvement as a scholar in the civil rights movement at UNC–Chapel Hill, some of his proudest political accomplishments, and his post-retirement plans. Price released the fourth edition of his book, The Congressional Experience, in 2020. He revised the book to cover the Obama and Trump administrations. After receiving his bachelor's degree at Carolina, he pursued graduate studies at Yale University to earn a theology degree (1964) and a PhD in political science (1969). Price is a professor of political science at Duke University's Sanford School of Public Policy.Music creditsThe intro music is by Scott Hallyburton '22, guitarist of the band South of the Soul. How to listenOn your mobile device, you can listen and subscribe to Catalyze on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. For any other podcast app, you can find the show using our RSS feed.Catalyze is hosted and produced by Sarah O'Carroll for the Morehead-Cain Foundation, home of the first merit scholarship program in the United States and located at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. You can let us know what you thought of the episode by finding us on Twitter or Instagram at @moreheadcain or you can email us at communications@moreheadcain.org.

Are you getting used to Presidents genuinely full of contradictions? Because WOW do we have that with Lyndon Johnson - a warmongering civil rights crusader ... a liberal bully ... a crude and ruthless political operator whose heart broke by the time he left the Presidency ... a guy misunderstood when alive being reconsidered with the advantage of time. (But don't worry - it's funny as Hell, too!) LBJ is here for your Electable goodness!This episode's sketches were Written, Produced, and Performed by:Gina BuccolaSandy BykowskiJoseph FedorkoSylvia MannPaul MoultonPatrick J. ReillyAnd Tommy SpearsThis Episode's Historians: Dr. Chelsea Denault, James McRaeOriginal Music written and performed by Throop McClergAudio production by Joseph FedorkoSound effects procured at Freesound.orgDB Comedy Logo Designed by Adam L. HarlettELECTABLES logo and Presidential Caricatures by Dan PolitoTHE ELECTABLES concept was created by Patrick J. Reilly.CAST AND CREDITS COLD OPEN – Written by Paul Moulton          Dr. Nair - Tommy          Joe - JoeTHE LYNDON B. JOHNSON SCHOOL OF POLITICAL PERSUASION – Written by Joseph Fedorko            J.H. – Tommy            Jeremy – Patrick            Jade – Sandy            Jasmine - SylviaTHE BIGGEST JOHNSON – Written by Tommy Spears (including Music)            LBJ - Patrick             Announcer AND Louis C.K. AND Jason Matsoukas - Tommy             Walter Cronkite - Paul             Ladybird/Sarah Silverman – Sylvia            Humphrey/Andy Dick - JoeJOHNSON SAUSAGES – Written by Sandy Bykowski            Announcer - Patrick             Housewife - Sylvia             Jingle - TommyDANIEL IN THE LION'S DEN – Written by Paul Moulton            LBJ – Patrick            Hoover – Joe            Ellsberg - TommyLBJ AND JFK – Written By Sandy Bykowski            LBJ – Patrick            Ladybird – Sandy            JFK – Tommy            McNamara – Joe            Oswald – Sylvia            Crowds - CastContributions to DB Comedy are graciously accepted by going to the DB COMEDY donation page at https://fundraising.fracturedatlas.org/db-comedy, the nonprofit fiscal sponsor of DB COMEDY. Donations are tax-deductible to the fullest extent allowed by law.For more information on DB Comedy and THE ELECTABLES, visit DB Comedy's web site, dbcomedy.com, or DB Comedy's host page on Simplecast.com. Follow us on Facebook at DB Comedy. Join us on The Trident Network, and listen to us on World Perspectives Radio Chicago, on Live365.com and Hard Lens Media!Thanks for listening! Thanks for downloading! Don't forget to subscribe! And don't forget to like!! 

Now we move back to February 1973. Judge Sirica, always trying to insure his place in the sun, asks the Congress to investigate. The Senate happily complies, originally under the guidance of an enthusiastic Senator, named Ted Kennedy.  There would be a fight about how the investigation would be handled, and what they would be looking into, and a partisan nearly straight party 77 - 0 vote. (Republicans decided not to vote) and a committee is formed.That committee would only look into the campaign shenanigans of the 1972 election. The Democrats had thwarted an attempt to include investigations that would have effected their former Presidents and the actions they took in 1968, 1964 and 1960.  I am guessing they already knew the games they had played and wanted to insure nobody else would find out, while they worked to expose the Nixon campaign. Here we will go through the actual debates, from a well written article by former CNN analyst Jeffrey Lord, and we will hear from Geoff Shepard about the actions that led to the committee formation. It was also decided because of the blatant partisanship so far shown, that Ted Kennedy needed not be front and center and so a North Carolina Senator was chosen to lead the effort.  Sam Ervin, one of the authors of the famous Southern Manifesto , an ardent supporter of segregation and foe to every Civil Rights Bill that had been offered up for the previous decade, but now ,  because of his role in Watergate, has had that part of his long and colorful history erased, as the left has canonized him as "The Senate's Greatest Constitutional Authority"  and as the man who saved the nation from Richard Nixon.  that Senator, Sam Ervin , would take over the committee and yet he would keep most of the Kennedy team  in place to control the narrative they would develop over a ratings bonanza summer. You will see that narrative no longer holds water. Then we will hear President Nixon on the phone with his White House Counsel John Dean, as they discuss dealing with the Grand Jury and the Senate and as March rolls through Nixon will ask Dean to come to see him to discuss the matters brewing on the other side of Pennsylvania Avenue. 

On April 11th, 1968, at the White House, Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1968. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Reverend Deborah L. Johnson was interviewed by Rev. Jackie Walden live in the Awakening Together sanctuary on Sunday February 20, 2022. Rev. Deb shares insight on forgiveness, grief, social justice, gratitude and saying YES. She reminds us that what the world needs most is for us to be awake. Rev. Deborah is the founding minister and president of Inner Light Ministries and The Motivational Institute. A life-long social justice activist, Rev. Deborah is the successful co-litigant in two landmark cases in California – one set precedent for the inclusion of sexual orientation in the state's Civil Rights Bill, the other defeated the challenge to legalizing domestic partnerships. A voice for compassion, equality, and reconciliation, her primary focus has been on coalition building, conflict resolution, public policy development, and cultural sensitivity awareness. She holds a vision of Oneness, beyond creed and doctrine, and feels particularly called to heal the sense of separation between those adhering to conservative and progressive ideologies. Her groundbreaking work has been featured in numerous books, magazines, radio, and television programs including Conversations with Neale (Neale Donald Walsch) radio show, Shambhala Sun magazine, Showtime TV's Black Filmmaker Showcase production, Jumpin' the Broom, the film God and Gays: Bridging the Gap, and ABC Nightline. Rev. Deborah is the author of The Sacred Yes and Your Deepest Intent of the Letters from the Infinite series, as well as Living the Sacred Yes: Affirmations for Action. She is also co-writer of several songs on Singing the Sacred Yes by Valerie Joi. Wherever she goes, her message is always one of possibility, inclusion, empowerment, and transformation. As an advocate for continual and lifelong learning, Rev. Deborah is a faculty member at several institutes of higher learning: UCLA's Anderson Graduate School of Business Executive Leadership Diversity Training Institute; Pacific School of Religion; Holmes Institute of Consciousness Studies; and the Agape University of Transformational Studies and Leadership. She is also an Advisory Council member in the Women's Studies Department at Brandeis University. She holds a BA in economics from USC, an MBA from UCLA, and a ministerial degree from the Holmes Institute. For more information Watch a video of Rev. Deborah on Light Streaming Follow Rev. Deborah on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/revdeborahjohnson Rev. Deborah's website: https://www.deborahljohnson.org For a link to a video of this satsang, visit: https://awakening-together.org/awakening-together-satsang-with-rev-deborah-johnson-2/

President Biden will go to Georgia tomorrow to give a speech on voting rights. It's expected to be as hard-hitting as his speech last Thursday about Trump and the attack on the Capitol. Biden will push for reform of the senate filibuster to carve out voting rights from its 60-vote requirement, thereby opening the way for senate Democrats to enact the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Amendment Act. As you probably know, the Freedom to Vote Act would preempt state efforts to suppress votes and take over election machinery. The John Lewis Voting Rights Amendment Act would restore the “pre-clearance” requirement of the 1965 Voting Rights Act (before the Supreme Court gutted it in 2013) which forced states with a history of discrimination – including Georgia -- to get Justice Department approval before they changed their voting rules.But Biden will need more than a hard-hitting speech to reform the filibuster and open the door for these two critical pieces of legislation. And his most important audience isn't in Georgia, which already has two Democratic senators who will support him. It's in West Virginia, whose senior Democratic senator is signaling he will not. Georgia is, however, strategically important to voting rights in other ways. It has several major races this year, including Senator Raphael Warnock's bid for reelection and Stacy Abrams' campaign for governor against Republican incumbent Brian Kemp. (The only reason Democrats have a Senate majority right now is because they prevailed in both of Georgia's runoff elections on January 5 of last year, electing Warnock and Senator Jon Ossoff.)Thanks for subscribing to my letter. If you'd like to support this effort (and be part of the conversation) please consider a paid or gift subscription. Georgia also typifies what's happening in several other southern states, such as North Carolina, Texas, and Arizona. Atlanta is becoming a major global economic hub, inhabited by upwardly-mobile and well-educated professionals who tend to vote for Democrats. Rural Georgia is a challenged economic backwater inhabited by less-educated voters who have been on a downward slide for years, making them highly susceptible to Trumpian racism and xenophobia, and Fox News's conspiracy theories. The shift toward cosmopolitan Atlanta hasn't yet changed the composition of Georgia's legislature, which is still dominated by Republicans. Shortly after Biden's victory, it passed laws requiring additional ID for absentee voting, removing early voting sites, and allowing state takeovers of county elections. Georgia's GOP lawmakers are now readying bills to nix voting touchscreen machines and expand probes into voter fraud, among other anti-democracy initiatives. Hence the importance of national voting rights legislation, and of the Democrats' move to reform the filibuster. Senate Democrats have given up on “Build Back Better” for now and are pivoting to voting rights, and a filibuster carveout for voting rights. But Manchin, the Holdout-in-Chief, is standing in the way, just as he did on “Build Back Better.” He says the only way he'll support a carveout from the filibuster for voting rights is if it's “bipartisan.”This is a bizarre argument, for several reasons. First, there's no precedent requiring that changes in the filibuster rule be bipartisan. In recent decades the rule has been changed several times -- most recently by McConnell and the Republicans, to confirm Supreme Court nominees with a bare majority – without bipartisan support.It's also bizarre because of America's history of racism, which has not been fought through bipartisanship. Representative Jim Clyburn from South Carolina, the third-ranking House Democrat, whose endorsement of Biden during the Democratic primaries put Biden over the top, put it bluntly:“I am, as you know, a Black person, descended of people who were given the vote by the 15th Amendment to the United States Constitution. The 15th amendment was not a bipartisan vote, it was a single party vote that gave Black people the right to vote. Manchin and others need to stop saying that because that gives me great pain for somebody to imply that the 15th Amendment of the United States Constitution is not legitimate because it did not have bipartisan buy-in.”Third, American democracy cannot be saved with “bipartisanship” when one party is out to destroy it. The filibuster is becoming less democratic by the day. As of now, just 41 Senate Republicans, representing only 21 percent of the country, are blocking laws supported by the vast majority.Manchin (and Kyrsten Sinema, who isn't even trying to explain her position on the filibuster or much of anything else) -- now the darlings of Republican donors -- apparently have more allegiance to the filibuster than to democracy. (By contrast, Senator Angus King, the Maine Independent who caucuses with the Democrats and had earlier rejected calls to reform the filibuster, says he has “concluded that democracy itself is more important than any Senate rule.”)Meanwhile, Senate Republicans, led by Mitch McConnell, are making noises about changing the Electoral Count Act of 1887 – an arcane law that establishes the process for certifying presidential elections. (Manchin and Sinema are in talks with Republicans about this.) Make no mistake: This is nothing more than an attempt to give cover to Senate Republicans (and perhaps Manchin and Sinema), who want to be seen as doing something to reform elections but don't want to protect voting rights. The Electoral Count Act of 1887 could stand some more clarity, to be sure. Its ambiguities about which parts of state governments are authorized to confirm voting tallies and appoint electors were exploited by Trump in 2020, and could lead to a Constitutional crisis if he runs again in 2024. But if you think McConnell wants to prevent Republican state legislatures from substituting their views about who won a presidential election for the views of independent election officials and county boards, I've got a bridge to sell you.Biden can't rely on Manchin for anything, and it's impossible to knows what Sinema is up to. So to get his fiftieth vote to carve out voting rights from the filibuster, Biden may need the support of one or two of the few Republican senators who have shown a shred of interest in, or integrity on, voting rights.My short list would include Susan Collins, who in 2015 joined John Lewis and other national leaders in Selma for the 50th Anniversary of Bloody Sunday; and Lisa Murkowski, the only Republican who voted to bring the John Lewis Voting Rights Act to a vote last fall. I'd also reach out to Mitt Romney, who voted to convict Donald Trump in the first impeachment trial. (Not incidentally, Romney's father, George Romney, was such a strong supporter of the Civil Rights Bill of 1964 that when the Republican's presidential nominee that year, Barry Goldwater, opposed it, Romney refused to support Goldwater's candidacy.)The purpose of trying to get one or two of these Republicans on board is not to get “bipartisan” support for carving out voting rights from the filibuster. It is to get a bare majority of the Senate to support American democracy. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit robertreich.substack.com/subscribe

Our individual sense that My Vote Matters and will cause a meaningful outcome is all each of us want. That has eroded for decades and may never have existed for young voters. Our vote has been relegated to dutifully selecting one of two candidates by party label. Little more.For our entire lives we’ve relied on the messages of each major Party to translate to policy that works in the interest of the American people. The competing party platforms are summarized by the size of government being reflective of our compassion for people versus a smaller government that is more fiscally responsible and allows people to self-determine.It’s obvious to all of us that the government is the largest one in history, assimilates every tax dollar and there are 43 million Americans living in poverty. That’s where we are terminally stuck, 21 years into the 21st Century.We see that each of the messages that we’ve voted for our entire lives have fallen woefully short. Without meaningful outcomes American votes have lost value to most Americans.This is where I am on my American journey. If you’re like me, then you’re fed up and just want more common-sense and humility in Congress to represent the affordable priorities of most Americans. Most of us like a little from each side, embrace the same American values and want the same equality of opportunity that cohesive policy and economic certainty can promote.No one represents American interests over political interests in Congress. Not even your Congressperson or Senator. They’re seemingly incapable and despite good intentions and modest actions are trapped by the system. The Congressional agenda is controlled by one person in both chambers, the respective majority leaders, and focuses entirely on supporting political interest and majority control of the chambers. The will of most American people rarely, if ever influences agenda or policy.Make “My Vote Matter” by Considering Candidates Who Are Likely to be Representative of Most AmericansAnticipate the Potential of a Coalition of Red & Blue Moderates, Who Can Control Congressional Agenda to Protect the Affordable Priorities of Most AmericansMaking “My Vote Matter” could be as basic as voting for a Congressional candidate who is likely to caucus as a red or blue moderate, in order to positively influence control of the agenda over the majority leader in each chamber. Voters would need to anticipate that other voters are of a like mind, know the rules for participating in their State’s Primary election, then just as important to the process, a candidate would be encouraged to run by anticipating that voters would turnout motivated to nominate a more representative candidate for the November 8th election.Matthew Yglesias and Steven Teles, in a recent The Atlantic article, A Moderate Proposal make a case for a coalition of red and blue Congressmembers who could control the agenda and move the Senate forward. They appropriately call the group a “Fulcrum”.Lee Drutman says in “Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America” that Congress was more responsive before the Civil Rights Bill of 1965 because of a Moderate red and blue membership that he calls “Shadow Parties”. The Republican and Democratic Parties as four parties. The shadow parties were red or blue moderates who identified with their party and who also considered the interests of their constituency. They moderated the debate. (Mr. Drutman hasn’t endorsed this solution. He is more in favor of Proportional Representation)Joseph Manchin and Kirsten Sinema, Moderate Democratic Senators, became pivotal (a fulcrum) recently. Their pushback was disruptive to bills from the Democratic Party. Their positions forced the two sides to have conversations that would’ve never occurred otherwise. It was not surprising that they were characterized through social media and corporate news as being extremists for their center position.Congressional Midterm Primaries are Low Turnout & Vulnerable to a Well-Executed Plan by Informed Voters!A Plan to Influence Control of 118th Congressional Agenda over Chamber Majority Leaders by two well-organized red & blue groups of Congress people.The 118th Congress, with more moderate Republican and Democratic Congressmembers could work together to control the agenda that will focus on the interests of Americans, instead of the nonstop politically oriented schedule and policies that favor the consortium of wealthy election donors that each chamber leader overtly serves at the expense of the American people.Rampart Caucus is an idea for sharing information that will inform and empower people like us to Vote in the 2022 Primaries to nominate humility and common-sense to the November 8, 2022 General Election for the 118th Congress. Red or Blue candidates who will also consider the interests of their constituency.Giving my single vote meaning and value and making it matter can only be achieved by giving like-minded people HOPE that we’ll all turnout at the next election and consider candidates who will most likely represent the affordable priorities of most Americans.Submitted Humbly for My Kids, Randell S. Hynes, Twitter @RandellHynes—What Each American Voter Should Know Before the 2022 Primary ElectionsMajor party doesn’t mean majority.Majority control of a chamber of Congress doesn’t mean that Party represents a majority of Americans.You’re not alone. Half of eligible Voters are not affiliated with a major Party.Is the Primary Election in my State called Open or Closed?Primary Elections to nominate a Party candidate are open to every American who updates their registration label. It’s a label, not a pledge.Closed doesn’t mean Prohibited.Party is just a label. How do I change my label if I’m in a “Closed” Primary State?My Primary Election location, time, procedure.Primary Election rules and procedures for My State.We can only vote in one Party Primary.More about each Candidate.You can Run for Congress by following your States filing rules. Here in Nevada the filing fee is $300. You must be registered in the desired Party before 12/31/21. Filing is in early March 2022. Other States have different rules. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit rampartcaucus.substack.com

Have You Ever Read The Civil Rights Bill? | Ep 9 : First We Build Podcast In "Have You Ever Read The Civil Rights Bill? " I go over the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In there we explore if the bill was a win for Black People. Also we look at other legislation that has been inspired by race base discrimination, and compare them with the Civil Rights Bill. Is America capability of specifying legislation for specific groups. #ADOS #FBA #PANAfrican Visit : https://linktr.ee/pushitfwd

Equity for the People:https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/equity-people Elizabeth's Medium article:https://elizabeth-hira.medium.com/at-what-cost-democracy-remembering-jfks-covert-interventions-on-guyanese-independence-day-fa111dd40ae4 Elizabeth's blog post about the For The People Act as the next great civil rights bill:https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/people-act-americas-next-great-civil-rights-bill  

This episode opens as Lyndon Johnson declares War on Poverty in America. LBJ had a vision of the America he wanted to create and unlike many of our Presidents this man was the quintessential legislator.  Johnson's ability to get legislation passed was an area of his job in which there has been no equal, whether you like what he passed or not. Johnson's Great Society changed America in fundamental ways and redefined what many Americans looked for in their Federal Government. One of the centerpieces of Johnson's Great Society was in the area of Civil Rights. He was a Southerner from the State of Texas and as such he knew what racial divisions looked like. As a former school teacher he saw the inequities in the lives of his students in Cotulla, the small Texas town he had taught in. He was determined to change the Jim Crow laws of the South.On the eve of the passage of his landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 , which would guarantee access to all public accommodations and ending segregation, three civil rights workers would disappear in Mississippi. Listen in as the President deals with this horrifying development. Listen as he talks to the Senator and Governor of the State of Mississippi, to an FBI Director who was himself no friend of the struggle for civil rights, listen as he calls one of the students mothers  and also listen as he closes the deal he needed to get the 1964 Civil Rights Bill passed. It is a fascinating look inside the wheeling and dealing this President would become famous for, and an education on the complexities of the job he had, and the times in which he served. 

S03-E10 We feature an interview with Malcolm X and Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. This event occurred on March 27, 1964. The press interviews Malcolm X and Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. amidst a Senatorial debate about the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Malcolm, calling the bill 'political chicanery,' wonders whether liberals are truly for Civil Rights legislation or not. Dr. King discusses possible direct action for making sure the bill is not filibustered. He expresses his intent to test the bill if and when it is passed. He also feels that the failure to pass the bill could lead to social disruption. The Civil Rights Act was signed into law on July 2, 1964. In addition to this audio episode, I also provide several PDF documents: first, an overview of the Civil Rights Bill of 1964, and then a pair of biographies of the two leaders. Let us now tune our radio dial to 1964 and listen to Malcolm X and Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. as they discuss civil rights issues. The following links allow you to subscribe: iTunes and Apple Podcast, Amazon Music/Audible, Castbox.fm, Deezer, Facebook, Gaana, Google Podcast, iHeartRadio, Player.fm, Radio Public, Samsung Listen, Spotify, Stitcher, TuneIn, Twitter. and Vurbl. Automatically available through these podcast apps: Castamatic, iCatcher, Overcast, Pocket Casts, RSSRadio, and more. Please post comments to the individual episodes at http://historicvoices.org, podcast review and rating section within iTunes and other apps, or email to me, arendale@umn.edu You can also checkout my other four podcasts and other social media at www.davidmedia.org

A late night/early morning helps push cannabis legalization legislation one step closer to the finish line. The Senate Judiciary Committee voted 5-4 to advance House Bill 12 to the full Senate just after 1:30am this morning. That was after hours of amendments and debate, which will no doubt foreshadow an epic showdown when and if the bill comes up for a vote of the full chamber. Read more about it all , and another bill that would limit reciprocity practices within the medical cannabis program in this morning's New Mexico Political Report. Andy Lyman is always right on top of these issues, and he just also happens to be co-host of our collaborative podcast project "Growing Forward." We also have updates for you this morning on predatory lending reform, the Civil Rights Bill and also the status of priority #1, the state budget (House Bill 2). And, we encourage you to read more about some of the internal dynamics of the Senate Judiciary Committee and chairman Joe Cervantes, from reporter

The first episode in our Podcast documentary and first season in production features an introduction to our series , which will be profiling various leaders from the last half of the 20th Century , and the lessons in leadership we so desperately need to learn  from them. In this first episode, we profile a surprising figure, Senator Strom Thurmond of South Carolina. He began his career as an Education Superintendent in Edgefield, South Carolina, then became a Judge, then landed at D-Day in a glider, helped liberate Nazi Concentration Camps, and came home to be elected a State Senator , Governor and, as a write in candidate, to the United States Senate. He would serve for 48 years until he reached the age of 100. He was a staunch Segregationist, who once talked on the Senate floor for 24 hours and 18 minutes in opposition to the 1957 Civil Rights Bill. But as the world changed, and South Carolina changed, he changed with it. He made a conscious decision to change and this symbol of the Old South became instrumental in opening the door to the New South. It was an enormously important decision to change, whether  sincere or calculated, and it sets an example many of us can learn from about not fighting the same old battles over and over again.  

Today's Topics: 1) Gospel - Matt 5:38-42 an eye for an eye. Bishop Sheen quote of the day 2) Civil rights veteran Bob Woodson rejects claims of 'systemic racism,'says black struggles issue of class 3]  Bill Gates Funds Pharmaceutical Companies Using Aborted Baby Parts to Make Coronavirus Vaccines https://www.lifenews.com/2020/06/11/bill-gates-funds-pharmaceutical-companies-using-aborted-baby-parts-to-make-coronavirus-vaccines/ 4]  COVID -19 contact tracker training: Quarantine ‘may be mandated and enforced’ https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/covid-19-contact-tracker-training-telling-people-to-quarantine-may-be-mandated-and-enforced  

Pandemics and plagues have been a part of our human history. No matter how developed the world becomes, a very microscopic bug can cause society to fall into collapse and kill millions of people. We are now living through an unprecedented moment in history with the Covid-19 Pandemic. There have been many of these pandemics in recent human history and one of the worst was the Spanish Flu Pandemic of 1918. This form of influenza was believed to have infected a third of the world's population at the time and lead to the deaths of 50 million people. The Moment in Oddity was suggested by Quoylette and features railworkers discovering a 14th Century cave and This Month in History features the Civil Rights Bill of 1866 passing. Our topic was suggested by allnew1995 and Carlston from Instagram. Check out the website: http://historygoesbump.com Show notes can be found here: https://historygoesbump.blogspot.com/2020/04/hgb-ep-332-spirits-of-spanish-flu.html Become an Executive Producer: http://patreon.com/historygoesbump The following music is from https://incompetech.filmmusic.io/: "Vanishing" by Kevin MacLeod (Moment in Oddity) "In Your Arms" by Kevin MacLeod (This Month in History) License: CC BY (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) All other music licensing: PODCASTMUSIC.COM License Synchronization, Mechanical, Master Use and Performance Direct License for a Single Podcast Series under current monthly subscription. Haunting Theme by 5 Alarm Music

IntroductionShelly Vitanza: Welcome to the LU Moment, thanks for listening. I'm Shelly Vitanza, the Director of Public Affairs at Lamar University. Each week we showcase the great events, activities, programs, projects, and people at Lamar University. February is Black History Month and this Friday we'll have a big celebration on campus honoring all African-American students who have had a 3.5 GPA for the last couple of semesters, which continues a long history of success for African-American students at Lamar University. In fact, well before the Civil Rights Bill, LU admitted African-American students. In 1956, 23 students entered LU. They were the first African-Americans. Six of them graduated two years later. Of course, it was Lamar Tech back then.  Shelly Vitanza: The list of successful African-American alumni is very lengthy. I requested the list and it's pages and pages long. But let me highlight one today. One that jumped off the page I thought was so great: Levy Dumas. He was the first African-American to graduate from Lamar University, which was Lamar Tech at the time, in 1966 with a Civil Engineering Degree. And in his lifetime, he just turned 80 last year in 2019, Mr. Dumas helped invent the HOV lane in California and the rail system in Atlanta, Georgia. Wow, that's pretty exciting. Had to highlight him. We'll highlight an African-American every show through February. President of SGA on the impact of student government (1:32)Shelly Vitanza: Let's follow that thread of successful students and talk with three I've got in studio today. I have with me Edward Doan, he's a Senior Chemical Engineering major and President of the Student Government Association. Welcome Edward. Edward Doan: Thank you for having me. Shelly Vitanza: I've got Katey McCall, she's a Senior Poli-Sci, Political Science major. Pretty exciting time to be a political science major, I can only imagine. Welcome Katey. Tyler Martin, Junior Mechanical Engineering major. He is a Junior and Class Senator for the Student Government. You guys, I brought you all in because you are making a big difference on the LU campus. Edward, I guess well, any of you can jump in at any time, but Edward, let's start with you. Edward Doan: Go ahead. Shelly Vitanza: You've got a big job as the President of the Student Government Association. What's going on with student government right now, and really what kind of power does the Student Government Association have at Lamar University? Can you really do something Edward? Edward Doan: Yes ma'am. The only way to sum it up in one sentence is to say that SGA, Student Government Association, works with students, try to figure out student problems, student issues, student concerns, and work with administration to draft different policies, action plans, programs to address those concerns. That sounds rather vague, but that's really the only way to say it succinctly. Shelly Vitanza: Do students bring those issues to you, to student government, to you personally? I mean, how does that work? Edward Doan: Any Avenue. Sometimes a student will just see as I'm walking to class, and they'll- Shelly Vitanza: Hey Edward! Edward Doan: Let me know something that's going on. Sometimes it's [crosstalk 00:03:15] Shelly Vitanza: I'm sure you love that. Yeah. Edward Doan: Yeah, it's great. Any way possible. As long as we hear it somehow through email, through our suggestion box, we'll take it to the next meeting and try to draft a plan around that. Shelly Vitanza: Great. What have you been working on? Have you accomplished some things? Have you got some things in the works? What's happening? Edward Doan: Yeah, so there's several types of projects. There's very short term projects and longterm projects. An example of a short term project would be short term, as in, we did what we could. Shelly...

Sura Khan and the Byron Allen fight with Comcast and Charter for Economic Inclusion, Civil Rights Bill. Continue reading → The post Podcast Episode #6 Media Mogul Byron Allen Law Suite appeared first on SURA KHAN-VSE ENTERPRISES LLC. .

On this episode of the Morning Convos Podcast host Ali Sheen plays a video hosted by his animated character Nathan Forrest . The episodes topic is the History of the Democratic Party LBJ and the 1964 civil rights bill. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/morningconvos/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/morningconvos/support

Other big cities across the U.S. have been shaped by housing segregation and redlining, but did that happen here? Host Kaila White looks into this issue that reaches back to before Arizona was a state and it still impacts Phoenix today, maybe even affecting your neighborhood. References: - FDR recording “NNV 169-59 [dig].” from 1940 from the Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library and Museum. - Ray Martinez recording from Arizona History, A Chicano Perspective (1985). F 820 M5 A77x 1985. Chicano/a Research Collection. ASU Library, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ. - President Johnson Signing the 1968 Civil Rights Bill, April 11, 1968 from the LBJ Presidential Library. - Read Elizabeth Montgomery’s article on Lincoln Ragsdale, “the Arizona Civil Rights pioneer who helped integrate Phoenix.” 

This episode of Some Jazz begins with a segment of a Dizzy Gillespie interview I discovered yesterday which added more rationale to a social media status I happened to read this week. I'm sorry, I cant recall who wrote the status or which platform it appeared on but the status advocated for piano being taught in schools to provide a firm foundation for budding musicians of all genres. I'm not a musician, so I don't know why the status stuck with me, but hearing Diz speak on its benefits days later was like a confirmation of sorts. Maybe one day I'll learn piano. Diz is considered one of the greatest trumpet players of all time, and an innovator of the genre as well as quite the jokester. In '63 he began a "tongue in cheek" campaign to run for president, with his platform built on bringing attention to the Civil Rights Bill which eventually passed the following year. His campaign buttons, bearing the slogan, "Dizzy Gillespie For President" were created by his booking agency as a gimmick. However, the proceeds from the sale of the buttons went to CORE, SCLC (Southern Christian Leadership Conference) and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr and are now collector's items. Enjoy my latest jazz compilation and illustration this Memorial Day! Blast at the cookout and on your commutes for an hour of some of the illest jazz sounds you'll partake of today. You know I had to get some afro-cuban in there for Diz, RIH Tracklist at WWW.BamaLoveSoul.com --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/bamalovesoul-radio/support

We are looking for advertisers who want to sponsor the Turtleboy Live show to keep it going. I love doing the show, it just takes up a good part of my weekend when I could be spending time with family and/or publishing blogs. So if you're interested in making some money by selling ad space on the show email turtelboysports@gmail.com and we can talk. I had 3 things I wanted to rant about on the show tonight: 1. Deplorable Deb and Stiletto Dee hiding from Turtleboy like snowflakes 2. Lil Shayne destroying his comedy career before it started 3. The crisis we are facing with social media censorship, and why Republicans have to stop being collaborating Vichy traitors and protect free speech on the Internet.

Manded Controversial 09 LBJ -  Lyndon Baines Johnson -Our  36th President- The Blessing and "Banes" on blacks. Juxtaposing  LBJ's  signing of the Civil Rights Bill into...

We discuss all things Ike with William Hitchcock - author of "The Age of Eisenhower."  We talk about how President Eisenhower was a surprisingly good politician, how he navigated Civil Rights, Social Security and other domestic programs, how he dealt with LBJ.  We discuss the failure that upset him the most, and what he may have gotten wrong.  We also get to the bottom of that Military Industrial Complex. Premium Podcast subscribers - Special episode where we go more into Eisenhower and the 1957 Civil Rights Bill- http://www.myhistorycanbeatupyourpoliticspremium.com  As little as 2 a month.  

Affirmative action is racist. Affirmative action is sexist. And sometimes both. Perhaps you can argue that discrimination based on race and sex is just fine in certain circumstances, but discrimination it is. Affirmative action began under Johnson, with the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and an executive order in 1965. In 1978 in the Bakke Case, the Supreme Court ruled that quotas were illegal, but race could still be used as a factor in making college admissions decisions. Didn’t that just eliminate the word “quota” while not changing anything about the quota process? Does anyone think that changed anything? Affirmative action proponents often talk about “qualified candidates.” Once establishing a pool of so-labeled candidates, the idea is to apply sex- and race-based preferences to hire and promote from within that pool. What happened to the concept of “best” candidate? Sports teams, both professional and college, are focused on selecting the best candidates. If that is the right thing for a college football team to do, why isn’t it even more right for that same college to use the same criterion, “best candidate” for, say, its medical school? People who question affirmative action often point out that the National Basketball Association mostly black and the National Football League, predominantly black, don’t race-balance their rosters. The quick response is that racial imbalance in the pursuit of excellence is okay because it is “just sports.” Exactly, it is just sports. And if affirmative action is okay anywhere, this is a perfect example where affirmative action might be defended. Sports. And other forms entertainment. Not in the medical profession. If you or a friend or loved one is on the operating table undergoing delicate surgery, are you content with a surgeon in the qualified pool who was promoted ahead of others due to race or sex? I’m not. For those who are, let’s set up a world where they can be taught by, are taken care of medically, and are responded to in emergencies by law enforcement officers and firefighters who were simply in the qualified pool and were in their positions due to affirmative action. I’ll reserve the best candidates for myself and those who believe as I do. Are you with me? Affirmative action as currently practiced leads not just to the “dumbing down” of America, but to the watering down of America. Eliminating the concept of “best”, substituting the concept of merely qualified is unfair to our society. By definition, our society will not be getting the best that it deserves. And it cheats the candidates of the invaluable lessons that come from the hard work, triumphs and tragedies that come along the way while pushing and striving to be the best. A moment ago, I said, “affirmative action as currently practiced.” What if we practiced it differently? When the Civil Rights Bill was passed in 1964, there were still egregious systemic discrimination--institutional and/or legally supported violations of basic human rights. (Hence the need for legislation.) Since then, all vestiges of systemic racism and sexism have been driven out of our society. If you disagree, please start by citing examples of ether that are institutional or legally supported. Right: there are none. (Well, affirmative action is the only example.) There is also cultural discrimination; there is more than enough here that we need to address this issue. And take it seriously. With systemic discrimination, we needed to change the rules, by-laws and regulations that govern the various institutions in our country. Like country clubs. And we needed to change the laws by which we are governed. With cultural discrimination, we need to change the way people think--starting with changing their hearts. You clearly can’t do that with laws; laws do not change hearts. And you can’t to that with challenging and belittling people over issues like pronouns, microaggressions and how Frenchman is okay,

Rev. Deborah L. Johnson is the founding minister and president of Inner Light Ministries, an Omnifaith outreach ministry dedicated to teaching the practical application of Universal Spiritual Principles to all of life’s circumstances.  She is also the founder and president of The Motivational Institute, an organizational development consulting firm specializing in cultural diversity serving the public, private, and non-profit sectors. Her clients range from Fortune 500 companies to community based organizations. She is a dynamic public speaker, known for her ability to bring clarity to complex and emotionally charged issues. A life-long social justice activist, Rev. Deborah is the successful co-litigant in two landmark cases in California – one set precedent for the inclusion of sexual orientation in the state’s Civil Rights Bill, the other defeated the challenge to legalizing domestic partnerships.  A voice for compassion, equality, and reconciliation, her primary focus has been on coalition building, conflict resolution, public policy development, and cultural sensitivity awareness. She holds a vision of Oneness, beyond creed and doctrine, and feels particularly called to heal the sense of separation between those adhering to conservative and progressive ideologies. Her groundbreaking work has been featured in numerous books, magazines, radio, and television programs including Conversations with Neale (Neale Donald Walsch) radio show, Shambhala Sun magazine, Showtime TV’s Black Filmmaker Showcase production Jumpin’ the Broom, the film God and Gays: Bridging the Gap, and ABC Nightline. Rev. Deborah is the author of the The Sacred Yes and Your Deepest Intent of the Letters from the Infinite series, as well as Living the Sacred Yes: Affirmations for Action.  She is co-writer of several songs on Singing the Sacred Yes by Valerie Joi. Wherever she goes, her message is always one of possibility, inclusion, empowerment and transformation. Rev. Deborah is an inductee into the Board of Preachers of the Martin Luther King Jr. Chapel at Morehouse College which honors clergy for their lifetime work in social justice. She is a leadership development trainer for the Network of Spiritual Progressives, founded by Rabbi Michael Lerner and the Tikkun Community, Cornel West, and Sister Joan Chittister. Rev. Deborah is a member of the Advisory Council of the Association for Global New Thought. She is also an original vision core member of the Agape International Spiritual Center in Los Angeles founded by her spiritual mentor, Michael Beckwith. As an advocate for continual and lifelong learning, Rev. Deborah is a faculty member at several institutes of higher learning: UCLA’s Anderson Graduate School of Business Executive Leadership Diversity Training Institute; Pacific School of Religion; Holmes Institute of Consciousness Studies; and the Agape University of Transformational Studies and Leadership. She is also an Advisory Council member in the Women’s Studies Department at Brandeis University. She holds a BA in economics from USC, an MBA from UCLA, and a ministerial degree from the Holmes Institute.

Happy Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Day! Today, I want us to take some time to reflect on what Dr. King really stood for. The American education system and the media only focus on the I Have a Dream speech given on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, but that message was not the entirety of Dr. King's message. The speech we will hear today and which is transcribed below was actually the last that Martin Luther King Jr. delivered in his life. It was given in Tennessee, supporting the Memphis Sanitation Workers' Strike the day before his assassination. The audience is much different from the millions who were listening to I Have a Dream in 1963, and the message is much more specific and directed to the Black Community as well. I hope this touches, motivates, and invigorates your spirit as deeply as it did mine. Thank you for sharing this moment with me. God bless. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. - Memphis, TN - April 3, 1968 [Text transcribed directly from audio] Thank you very kindly, my friends. As I listened to Ralph Abernathy and his eloquent and generous introduction and then thought about myself, I wondered who he was talking about. It's always good to have your closest friend and associate to say something good about you. And Ralph Abernathy is the best friend that I have in the world. I'm delighted to see each of you here tonight in spite of a storm warning. You reveal that you are determined to go on anyhow. Something is happening in Memphis; something is happening in our world. And you know, if I were standing at the beginning of time, with the possibility of taking a kind of general and panoramic view of the whole of human history up to now, and the Almighty said to me, "Martin Luther King, which age would you like to live in?" I would take my mental flight by Egypt and I would watch God's children in their magnificent trek from the dark dungeons of Egypt through, or rather across the Red Sea, through the wilderness on toward the promised land. And in spite of its magnificence, I wouldn't stop there. I would move on by Greece and take my mind to Mount Olympus. And I would see Plato, Aristotle, Socrates, Euripides and Aristophanes assembled around the Parthenon. And I would watch them around the Parthenon as they discussed the great and eternal issues of reality. But I wouldn't stop there. I would go on, even to the great heyday of the Roman Empire. And I would see developments around there, through various emperors and leaders. But I wouldn't stop there. I would even come up to the day of the Renaissance, and get a quick picture of all that the Renaissance did for the cultural and aesthetic life of man. But I wouldn't stop there. I would even go by the way that the man for whom I am named had his habitat. And I would watch Martin Luther as he tacked his Ninety-five Theses on the door at the Church of Wittenberg. But I wouldn't stop there. I would come on up even to 1863, and watch a vacillating President by the name of Abraham Lincoln finally come to the conclusion that he had to sign the Emancipation Proclamation. But I wouldn't stop there. I would even come up to the early thirties, and see a man grappling with the problems of the bankruptcy of his nation. And come with an eloquent cry that We Have Nothing to Fear but "Fear Itself." But I wouldn't stop there. Strangely enough, I would turn to the Almighty, and say, "If you allow me to live just a few years in the second half of the 20th century, I will be happy." Now that's a strange statement to make, because the world is all messed up. The nation is sick. Trouble is in the land; confusion all around. That's a strange statement. But I know, somehow, that only when it is dark enough can you see the stars. And I see God working in this period of the twentieth century in a way that men, in some strange way, are responding. Something is happening in our world. The masses of people are rising up. And wherever they are assembled today, whether they are in Johannesburg, South Africa; Nairobi, Kenya; Accra, Ghana; New York City; Atlanta, Georgia; Jackson, Mississippi; or Memphis, Tennessee -- the cry is always the same: "We want to be free." And another reason that I'm happy to live in this period is that we have been forced to a point where we are going to have to grapple with the problems that men have been trying to grapple with through history, but the demands didn't force them to do it. Survival demands that we grapple with them. Men, for years now, have been talking about war and peace. But now, no longer can they just talk about it. It is no longer a choice between violence and nonviolence in this world; it's nonviolence or nonexistence. That is where we are today. And also in the human rights revolution, if something isn't done, and done in a hurry, to bring the colored peoples of the world out of their long years of poverty, their long years of hurt and neglect, the whole world is doomed. Now, I'm just happy that God has allowed me to live in this period to see what is unfolding. And I'm happy that He's allowed me to be in Memphis. I can remember -- I can remember when Negroes were just going around as Ralph has said, so often, scratching where they didn't itch, and laughing when they were not tickled. But that day is all over. We mean business now, and we are determined to gain our rightful place in God's world. And that's all this whole thing is about. We aren't engaged in any negative protest and in any negative arguments with anybody. We are saying that we are determined to be men. We are determined to be people. We are saying -- We are saying that we are God's children. And that we are God's children, we don't have to live like we are forced to live. Now, what does all of this mean in this great period of history? It means that we've got to stay together. We've got to stay together and maintain unity. You know, whenever Pharaoh wanted to prolong the period of slavery in Egypt, he had a favorite, favorite formula for doing it. What was that? He kept the slaves fighting among themselves. But whenever the slaves get together, something happens in Pharaoh's court, and he cannot hold the slaves in slavery. When the slaves get together, that's the beginning of getting out of slavery. Now let us maintain unity. Secondly, let us keep the issues where they are. The issue is injustice. The issue is the refusal of Memphis to be fair and honest in its dealings with its public servants, who happen to be sanitation workers. Now, we've got to keep attention on that. That's always the problem with a little violence. You know what happened the other day, and the press dealt only with the window-breaking. I read the articles. They very seldom got around to mentioning the fact that one thousand, three hundred sanitation workers are on strike, and that Memphis is not being fair to them, and that Mayor Loeb is in dire need of a doctor. They didn't get around to that. Now we're going to march again, and we've got to march again, in order to put the issue where it is supposed to be -- and force everybody to see that there are thirteen hundred of God's children here suffering, sometimes going hungry, going through dark and dreary nights wondering how this thing is going to come out. That's the issue. And we've got to say to the nation: We know how it's coming out. For when people get caught up with that which is right and they are willing to sacrifice for it, there is no stopping point short of victory. We aren't going to let any mace stop us. We are masters in our nonviolent movement in disarming police forces; they don't know what to do. I've seen them so often. I remember in Birmingham, Alabama, when we were in that majestic struggle there, we would move out of the 16th Street Baptist Church day after day; by the hundreds we would move out. And Bull Connor would tell them to send the dogs forth, and they did come; but we just went before the dogs singing, "Ain't gonna let nobody turn me around." Bull Connor next would say, "Turn the fire hoses on." And as I said to you the other night, Bull Connor didn't know history. He knew a kind of physics that somehow didn't relate to the transphysics that we knew about. And that was the fact that there was a certain kind of fire that no water could put out. And we went before the fire hoses; we had known water. If we were Baptist or some other denominations, we had been immersed. If we were Methodist, and some others, we had been sprinkled, but we knew water. That couldn't stop us. And we just went on before the dogs and we would look at them; and we'd go on before the water hoses and we would look at it, and we'd just go on singing "Over my head I see freedom in the air." And then we would be thrown in the paddy wagons, and sometimes we were stacked in there like sardines in a can. And they would throw us in, and old Bull would say, "Take 'em off," and they did; and we would just go in the paddy wagon singing, "We Shall Overcome." And every now and then we'd get in jail, and we'd see the jailers looking through the windows being moved by our prayers, and being moved by our words and our songs. And there was a power there which Bull Connor couldn't adjust to; and so we ended up transforming Bull into a steer, and we won our struggle in Birmingham. Now we've got to go on in Memphis just like that. I call upon you to be with us when we go out Monday. Now about injunctions: We have an injunction and we're going into court tomorrow morning to fight this illegal, unconstitutional injunction. All we say to America is, "Be true to what you said on paper." If I lived in China or even Russia, or any totalitarian country, maybe I could understand some of these illegal injunctions. Maybe I could understand the denial of certain basic First Amendment privileges, because they hadn't committed themselves to that over there. But somewhere I read of the freedom of assembly. Somewhere I read of the freedom of speech. Somewhere I read of the freedom of press. Somewhere I read that the greatness of America is the right to protest for right. And so just as I say, we aren't going to let dogs or water hoses turn us around, we aren't going to let any injunction turn us around. We are going on. We need all of you. And you know what's beautiful to me is to see all of these Ministers of the Gospel. It's a marvelous picture. Who is it that is supposed to articulate the longings and aspirations of the people more than the preacher? Somehow the preacher must have a kind of fire shut up in his bones. And whenever injustice is around he tell it. Somehow the preacher must be an Amos, and saith, "When God speaks who can but prophesy?" Again with Amos, "Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream." Somehow the preacher must say with Jesus, "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me," and he's anointed me to deal with the problems of the poor." And I want to commend the preachers, under the leadership of these noble men: James Lawson, one who has been in this struggle for many years; he's been to jail for struggling; he's been kicked out of Vanderbilt University for this struggle, but he's still going on, fighting for the rights of his people. Reverend Ralph Jackson, Billy Kiles; I could just go right on down the list, but time will not permit. But I want to thank all of them. And I want you to thank them, because so often, preachers aren't concerned about anything but themselves. And I'm always happy to see a relevant ministry. It's all right to talk about "long white robes over yonder," in all of its symbolism. But ultimately people want some suits and dresses and shoes to wear down here! It's all right to talk about "streets flowing with milk and honey," but God has commanded us to be concerned about the slums down here, and his children who can't eat three square meals a day. It's all right to talk about the new Jerusalem, but one day, God's preacher must talk about the new New York, the new Atlanta, the new Philadelphia, the new Los Angeles, the new Memphis, Tennessee. This is what we have to do. Now the other thing we'll have to do is this: Always anchor our external direct action with the power of economic withdrawal. Now, we are poor people. Individually, we are poor when you compare us with white society in America. We are poor. Never stop and forget that collectively -- that means all of us together -- collectively we are richer than all the nations in the world, with the exception of nine. Did you ever think about that? After you leave the United States, Soviet Russia, Great Britain, West Germany, France, and I could name the others, the American Negro collectively is richer than most nations of the world. We have an annual income of more than thirty billion dollars a year, which is more than all of the exports of the United States, and more than the national budget of Canada. Did you know that? That's power right there, if we know how to pool it. We don't have to argue with anybody. We don't have to curse and go around acting bad with our words. We don't need any bricks and bottles. We don't need any Molotov cocktails. We just need to go around to these stores, and to these massive industries in our country, and say, "God sent us by here, to say to you that you're not treating his children right. And we've come by here to ask you to make the first item on your agenda fair treatment, where God's children are concerned. Now, if you are not prepared to do that, we do have an agenda that we must follow. And our agenda calls for withdrawing economic support from you." And so, as a result of this, we are asking you tonight, to go out and tell your neighbors not to buy Coca-Cola in Memphis. Go by and tell them not to buy Sealtest milk. Tell them not to buy -- what is the other bread? -- Wonder Bread. And what is the other bread company, Jesse? Tell them not to buy Hart's bread. As Jesse Jackson has said, up to now, only the garbage men have been feeling pain; now we must kind of redistribute the pain. We are choosing these companies because they haven't been fair in their hiring policies; and we are choosing them because they can begin the process of saying they are going to support the needs and the rights of these men who are on strike. And then they can move on town -- downtown and tell Mayor Loeb to do what is right. But not only that, we've got to strengthen black institutions. I call upon you to take your money out of the banks downtown and deposit your money in Tri-State Bank. We want a "bank-in" movement in Memphis. Go by the savings and loan association. I'm not asking you something that we don't do ourselves at SCLC. Judge Hooks and others will tell you that we have an account here in the savings and loan association from the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. We are telling you to follow what we are doing. Put your money there. You have six or seven black insurance companies here in the city of Memphis. Take out your insurance there. We want to have an "insurance-in." Now these are some practical things that we can do. We begin the process of building a greater economic base. And at the same time, we are putting pressure where it really hurts. I ask you to follow through here. Now, let me say as I move to my conclusion that we've got to give ourselves to this struggle until the end. Nothing would be more tragic than to stop at this point in Memphis. We've got to see it through. And when we have our march, you need to be there. If it means leaving work, if it means leaving school -- be there. Be concerned about your brother. You may not be on strike. But either we go up together, or we go down together. Let us develop a kind of dangerous unselfishness. One day a man came to Jesus, and he wanted to raise some questions about some vital matters of life. At points he wanted to trick Jesus, and show him that he knew a little more than Jesus knew and throw him off base.... Now that question could have easily ended up in a philosophical and theological debate. But Jesus immediately pulled that question from mid-air, and placed it on a dangerous curve between Jerusalem and Jericho. And he talked about a certain man, who fell among thieves. You remember that a Levite and a priest passed by on the other side. They didn't stop to help him. And finally a man of another race came by. He got down from his beast, decided not to be compassionate by proxy. But he got down with him, administered first aid, and helped the man in need. Jesus ended up saying, this was the good man, this was the great man, because he had the capacity to project the "I" into the "thou," and to be concerned about his brother. Now you know, we use our imagination a great deal to try to determine why the priest and the Levite didn't stop. At times we say they were busy going to a church meeting, an ecclesiastical gathering, and they had to get on down to Jerusalem so they wouldn't be late for their meeting. At other times we would speculate that there was a religious law that "One who was engaged in religious ceremonials was not to touch a human body twenty-four hours before the ceremony." And every now and then we begin to wonder whether maybe they were not going down to Jerusalem -- or down to Jericho, rather to organize a "Jericho Road Improvement Association." That's a possibility. Maybe they felt that it was better to deal with the problem from the causal root, rather than to get bogged down with an individual effect. But I'm going to tell you what my imagination tells me. It's possible that those men were afraid. You see, the Jericho road is a dangerous road. I remember when Mrs. King and I were first in Jerusalem. We rented a car and drove from Jerusalem down to Jericho. And as soon as we got on that road, I said to my wife, "I can see why Jesus used this as the setting for his parable." It's a winding, meandering road. It's really conducive for ambushing. You start out in Jerusalem, which is about 1200 miles -- or rather 1200 feet above sea level. And by the time you get down to Jericho, fifteen or twenty minutes later, you're about 2200 feet below sea level. That's a dangerous road. In the days of Jesus it came to be known as the "Bloody Pass." And you know, it's possible that the priest and the Levite looked over that man on the ground and wondered if the robbers were still around. Or it's possible that they felt that the man on the ground was merely faking. And he was acting like he had been robbed and hurt, in order to seize them over there, lure them there for quick and easy seizure. And so the first question that the priest asked -- the first question that the Levite asked was, "If I stop to help this man, what will happen to me?" But then the Good Samaritan came by. And he reversed the question: "If I do not stop to help this man, what will happen to him?" That's the question before you tonight. Not, "If I stop to help the sanitation workers, what will happen to my job. Not, "If I stop to help the sanitation workers what will happen to all of the hours that I usually spend in my office every day and every week as a pastor?" The question is not, "If I stop to help this man in need, what will happen to me?" The question is, "If I do not stop to help the sanitation workers, what will happen to them?" That's the question. Let us rise up tonight with a greater readiness. Let us stand with a greater determination. And let us move on in these powerful days, these days of challenge to make America what it ought to be. We have an opportunity to make America a better nation. And I want to thank God, once more, for allowing me to be here with you. You know, several years ago, I was in New York City autographing the first book that I had written. And while sitting there autographing books, a demented black woman came up. The only question I heard from her was, "Are you Martin Luther King?" And I was looking down writing, and I said, "Yes." And the next minute I felt something beating on my chest. Before I knew it I had been stabbed by this demented woman. I was rushed to Harlem Hospital. It was a dark Saturday afternoon. And that blade had gone through, and the X-rays revealed that the tip of the blade was on the edge of my aorta, the main artery. And once that's punctured, your drowned in your own blood -- that's the end of you. It came out in the New York Times the next morning, that if I had merely sneezed, I would have died. Well, about four days later, they allowed me, after the operation, after my chest had been opened, and the blade had been taken out, to move around in the wheel chair in the hospital. They allowed me to read some of the mail that came in, and from all over the states and the world, kind letters came in. I read a few, but one of them I will never forget. I had received one from the President and the Vice-President. I've forgotten what those telegrams said. I'd received a visit and a letter from the Governor of New York, but I've forgotten what that letter said. But there was another letter that came from a little girl, a young girl who was a student at the White Plains High School. And I looked at that letter, and I'll never forget it. It said simply, "Dear Dr. King, I am a ninth-grade student at the White Plains High School." And she said, "While it should not matter, I would like to mention that I'm a white girl. I read in the paper of your misfortune, and of your suffering. And I read that if you had sneezed, you would have died. And I'm simply writing you to say that I'm so happy that you didn't sneeze." And I want to say tonight -- I want to say tonight that I too am happy that I didn't sneeze. Because if I had sneezed, I wouldn't have been around here in 1960, when students all over the South started sitting-in at lunch counters. And I knew that as they were sitting in, they were really standing up for the best in the American dream, and taking the whole nation back to those great wells of democracy which were dug deep by the Founding Fathers in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. If I had sneezed, I wouldn't have been around here in 1961, when we decided to take a ride for freedom and ended segregation in inter-state travel. If I had sneezed, I wouldn't have been around here in 1962, when Negroes in Albany, Georgia, decided to straighten their backs up. And whenever men and women straighten their backs up, they are going somewhere, because a man can't ride your back unless it is bent. If I had sneezed -- If I had sneezed I wouldn't have been here in 1963, when the black people of Birmingham, Alabama, aroused the conscience of this nation, and brought into being the Civil Rights Bill. If I had sneezed, I wouldn't have had a chance later that year, in August, to try to tell America about a dream that I had had. If I had sneezed, I wouldn't have been down in Selma, Alabama, to see the great Movement there. If I had sneezed, I wouldn't have been in Memphis to see a community rally around those brothers and sisters who are suffering. I'm so happy that I didn't sneeze. And they were telling me --. Now, it doesn't matter, now. It really doesn't matter what happens now. I left Atlanta this morning, and as we got started on the plane, there were six of us. The pilot said over the public address system, "We are sorry for the delay, but we have Dr. Martin Luther King on the plane. And to be sure that all of the bags were checked, and to be sure that nothing would be wrong with on the plane, we had to check out everything carefully. And we've had the plane protected and guarded all night." And then I got into Memphis. And some began to say the threats, or talk about the threats that were out. What would happen to me from some of our sick white brothers? Well, I don't know what will happen now. We've got some difficult days ahead. But it really doesn't matter with me now, because I've been to the mountaintop. And I don't mind. Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I'm not concerned about that now. I just want to do God's will. And He's allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I've looked over. And I've seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land! And so I'm happy, tonight. I'm not worried about anything. I'm not fearing any man! Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord!!

Martin Luther King Jr. delivers his “I have a dream” speech on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. When U.S. President John F. Kennedy proposed the Civil Rights Bill to Congress, Southern representatives blocked it. To build political pressure for the bill, civil rights leaders staged a march on Washington on August 28, 1963 that drew over 250,000 people. Martin Luther King Jr. was one of the key speakers on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. Although it is hard to discern from the film, one account states that after delivering his prepared speech, King was about to sit down when gospel singer Mahalia Jackson called out, “Tell them about your dream, Martin!” What is certain is that King then delivered his “I have a dream” speech, which became so famous that many say it still defines the civil rights movement. “I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character,” King said. He ended with his wish to let “freedom ring” throughout the United States. And when it does, he said, Americans “…will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual: ‘Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!’” Although President Kennedy was assassinated less than three months later – before the bill was passed – President Johnson ushered the bill into being on July 2, 1964, thus fulfilling a dream nurtured by both Kennedy and King. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

This week on IWIR -- Civil rights bill dies in both houses. The governor's race. Tax hikes. Presidential campaign. And White River beaches.

A gay and lesbian civil rights bill might be dead for this legislative session.

Two segments on The 10 At 10, one on the bill that was introduced by Senate Republicans, the other on the rallies that took place at the Statehouse before and during Organization Day.

Old songs like old photographs are the purveyors of a kind of double imagery.  They  are  short circuits in time that make yesterdays events, today’s reality.  One such song, is "DANCING IN THE STREET" by Martha and the Vandellas.  Almost a work of art, it conveys and captures an entire ethos in its 2 minutes and 36 seconds.  It was recorded in the summer of l964.  The beginning of the Vietnam War, and the Berkeley Free Speech Movement.  It was the Mississippi Freedom Summer;  we’d see the passage of the Civil Rights Bill and it was a time when serious and ironic was becoming the meme of the day. Yet this pop song would become the anthem for changing America.It’s the subject of best selling author Mark Kurlansky’s Ready For a Brand New Beat: How "Dancing in the Street" Became the Anthem for a Changing America.My conversation with Mark Kurlansky:

Abernathy starred for four years as a Series Regular on Lifetime Television’s critically acclaimed dramatic series, “ANY DAY NOW.” She received critical acclaim from Film Critic Roger Ebert for her performance in “GODS AND GENERALS” for Warner Bros. She also starred in New Line Cinema’s comedy “GRILLED” and Lions Gate’s comedy “LEPRECHAN 6 – Back 2 ‘Da Hood.” She was the leading lady in the HBO award winning film, “Don King-ONLY IN AMERICA,” NBC’s award nominated “THE TEMPEST,” opposite Peter Fonda, also HBO’s award winning “MISS EVERS BOYS” and the Directors Guild of America award winning “MURDER IN MISSISSIPPI.” She is up coming in the independent film,“59 SECONDS” and has starred in DELMAR’S PORCH, CSI Las Vegas, Lincoln Heights, House, Commander and Chief, The Closer, Judging Amy and 24. Along with her husband Dar Dixon Bijarchi, they have created, produced and directed the TV project “ST. FRANCIS.” Born in the midst of the Civil Rights Movement to Juanita and Rev Dr Ralph David Abernathy, who created with his best friend Dr Martin Luther King, Jr. the Civil Rights Movement. She attended all of the major Civil Rights Marches and integrated the elementary school system in the South. Because the Abernathy home was the preferred meeting place for Dr. King and Dr. Abernathy, Donzaleigh had a myopic view into the integral decision making process that helped to shape American laws and society by the creation of the Civil Rights Bill,the Public Accommodations Act and the Voting Rights Act. Abernathy authored the history book, “PARTNERS TO HISTORY, Martin Luther King, Ralph David Abernathy and the Civil Rights Movement,” published by Random House/Crown. Ms. Abernathy is a founding member of the Board of Trustees of the New Visions Foundation which created New Roads Schools and several other schools in the Los Angeles area.

09.04.1866: Gott hat alle Menschen gleich geschaffen. So steht es in der Bibel, und so hat es deshalb auch die Verfassung der jungen Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika wiederholt. Doch dann verdiente man so schön am Sklavenhandel. Sollte man also wirklich auch die Schwarzen zu den Menschen zählen? Der Weg war noch lang, bis am 9. April 1866 die Afroamerikaner endlich das Bürgerrecht erhielten ...