Blog on the Run: Reloaded

Saturday, August 23, 2014 6:51 pm

“I’m convinced to my core: The lack of such a database [of police killings] is intentional.”


The question has been raised a lot in recent years: How many people die each year at the hands of the police?

There’s no good way to find out, so D. Brian Burghart of the Reno (Nev.) News & Review set out to try to find out after driving past the scene of an officer-involved shooting about two years ago. He has enlisted the Internet to help him find out.

This, by damn, is why we have, and need, an Internet.

He’s compiling what he and others find, after rigorous fact-checking, at fatalencounters.org. Here’s how he got involved in it:

It began simply enough. Commuting home from my work at Reno’s alt-weekly newspaper, the News & Review, on May 18, 2012, I drove past the aftermath of a police shooting—in this case, that of a man named Jace Herndon. It was a chaotic scene, and I couldn’t help but wonder how often it happened.

I went home and grabbed my laptop and a glass of wine and tried to find out. I found nothing—a failure I simply chalked up to incompetent local media.

A few months later I read about the Dec. 6, 2012, killing of a naked and unarmed 18-year-old college student, Gil Collar, by University of South Alabama police. The killing had attracted national coverage—The New York Times, the Associated Press, CNN—but there was still no context being provided—no figures examining how many people are killed by police.

I started to search in earnest. Nowhere could I find out how many people died during interactions with police in the United States. Try as I might, I just couldn’t wrap my head around that idea. How was it that, in the 21st century, this data wasn’t being tracked, compiled, and made available to the public? How could journalists know if police were killing too many people in their town if they didn’t have a way to compare to other cities? Hell, how could citizens or police? How could cops possibly know “best practices” for dealing with any fluid situation? They couldn’t.

The bottom line was that I found the absence of such a library of police killings offensive. And so I decided to build it. I’m still building it. But I could use some help. You can find my growing database of deadly police violence here, at Fatal Encounters, and I invite you to go here, research one of the listed shootings, fill out the row, and change its background color. It’ll take you about 25 minutes. There are thousands to choose from, and another 2,000 or so on my cloud drive that I haven’t even added yet. After I fact-check and fill in the cracks, your contribution will be added to largest database about police violence in the country. Feel free to check out what has been collected about your locale’s information here.

This is some righteous crowdsourcing, let me tell you.

And what has he learned from all this? Two things, both of them sad and infuriating.

The biggest thing I’ve taken away from this project is something I’ll never be able to prove, but I’m convinced to my core: The lack of such a database is intentional. No government—not the federal government, and not the thousands of municipalities that give their police forces license to use deadly force—wants you to know how many people it kills and why.

It’s the only conclusion that can be drawn from the evidence. What evidence? In attempting to collect this information, I was lied to and delayed by the FBI, even when I was only trying to find out the addresses of police departments to make public records requests. The government collects millions of bits of data annually about law enforcement in its Uniform Crime Report, but it doesn’t collect information about the most consequential act a law enforcer can do.

I’ve been lied to and delayed by state, county and local law enforcement agencies—almost every time. They’ve blatantly broken public records laws, and then thumbed their authoritarian noses at the temerity of a citizen asking for information that might embarrass the agency. And these are the people in charge of enforcing the law.

The second biggest thing I learned is that bad journalism colludes with police to hide this information. The primary reason for this is that police will cut off information to reporters who tell tales. And a reporter can’t work if he or she can’t talk to sources. It happened to me on almost every level as I advanced this year-long Fatal Encounters series through the News & Review. First they talk; then they stop, then they roadblock.

He elaborates on how journalism is failing to deal with this problem. I don’t think it’s quite as intentional as he does, but I do think the consciousness of a lot of reporters and editors needs to be raised on this issue. That means being intentional and serious about collecting data, to the point of lawsuits in jurisdictions in which the law is on journalists’ side.

And it also means taking up for what Jesus called “the least of these,” because — surprise! — that’s who most often winds up dead at the hands of law enforcement:

Journalists also don’t generally report the race of the person killed. Why? It’s unethical to report it unless it’s germane to the story. But race is always germane when police kill somebody.

This is the most most heinous thing I’ve learned in my two years compiling Fatal Encounters. You know who dies in the most population-dense areas? Black men. You know who dies in the least population dense areas? Mentally ill men. It’s not to say there aren’t dangerous and desperate criminals killed across the line. But African-Americans and the mentally ill people make up a huge percentage of people killed by police.

And if you want to get down to nut-cuttin’ time, across the board, it’s poor people who are killed by police. (And by the way, around 96 percent of people killed by police are men.)

I’d like to think that my local daily will get better at this, but I know better. So I’m going to see if I can help this project out. Wherever you are, I hope you will, too. We empower police officers with the right to use deadly force if necessary to protect themselves or innocent others. We deserve in return a full and complete accounting of how that right is used, or misused. There is no excuse for law enforcement to provide less, and there is no excuse for those departments’ communities, including but not limited to news outlets, to expect less.

(h/t: John Robinson)

Advertisements

20 Comments »

  1. This week’s issue of The Economist, writing on the US police issue, uses a graphic of deaths from police shootings in several countries to illustrate the problem in the States. This magazine is usually rigorously sourced and fact-checked, but the graphic contains only “National sources” as its sourceline and “Latest available year” as its data point. Seems it had the same problem as Burghart. Oh yes, in case you’re interested, the data show zero police killings in the UK, zero in Japan, eight in Germany and 409 in the US…

    Comment by Blair Pethel — Sunday, August 24, 2014 2:33 am @ 2:33 am | Reply

  2. Blair,

    The US has a vastly larger population and a lot more well armed criminal thugs than the countries you cite.. How many of the US shootings were in defense of the officers life ?

    Just yesterday California police officer gunned down and no protests or looting…imagine that

    FBI Releases 2013 Preliminary Statistics for Law Enforcement Officers Killed in the Line of Duty Down from 2012 but still too many.

    “Journalists also don’t generally report the race of the person killed. Why? It’s unethical to report it unless it’s germane to the story. But race is always germane when police kill somebody”

    Let’s stop a moment and ask,. Is it not germane when anyone is killed . Can you saw Chicagoland ? I suspect the events in Ferguson prompted this post although it is not specifically mentioned, only implied but a logical extension

    At the risk of being called the R word, I am going to post this and duck

    Comment by Fred Grergory — Sunday, August 24, 2014 6:07 pm @ 6:07 pm | Reply

  3. I guess you’ve pretty much put your finger on the core problem there, Fred.

    Comment by Blair Pethel — Monday, August 25, 2014 1:45 am @ 1:45 am | Reply

  4. So much bullshit packed into six minutes of video that I’m afraid YouTube’s servers are gonna ‘splode.

    Why did the AG pressure the police not to release the video? Because it was irrelevant to Michael Brown’s killing. The officer didn’t stop him on suspicion of robbery because the officer didn’t KNOW about the robbery. He stopped Brown for (for God’s sake) jaywalking. Moreover, no one at the store called police to report a robbery; the police asked the store for the video only after Brown was already dead.

    Oh, and then there’s this: The video actually appears to show Brown paying for the cigars:

    Apparently Whittle couldn’t be bothered to mention that.

    Whittle’s inference of a “sense of entitlement” and “disrespect for the law” is no better than, say, my inferring racism on your part for posting this Whittle video. I’m just dealing with facts here, some if not all of which you might honestly have been completely unaware of at the time you posted the video. “That attitude has nothing to do with the police claiming that he was charging when he was shot?” First of all, what attitude? Neither Whittle nor anyone else has proved that Brown had such an attitude, and I guarantee you that’s not something provable post-mortem. Thus, Whittle’s comment is not just a reach, it’s a smear, particularly inasmuch as three separate, independent eyewitnesses have come forward to say that Brown did not “charge” Officer Wilson at any point, irrespective of whatever his attitude might have been.

    Then, between about 1:40 and 2:28, Whittle falsely implies that all occasions in which black teens are shot by white officers pertain directly to robberies, a claim no one has made because it’s ridiculous. Since such robberies occur at the rate of 1,100 a day, he implies, we should be hearing about a lot more shootings. Which … what? He also says that we only hear about such a case “once every few years or so.” A simple Google search shows that that’s not true, even if, as I noted earlier, we don’t know (likely because we have decided we don’t want to know; it’s not like we lack the means of finding out) exactly how many officer-involved fatalities there are in the United States every year.

    Whittle then attempts to change the subject from white-on-black violence carried out by police against civilians to all types of interracial crime, hoping we won’t note the difference: That cops are empowered by law to use deadly force. That’s so intellectually dishonest I’m surprised his own brain didn’t leap out of his butthole and flee, screaming, into the night.

    Look, Whittle is the guy who urged people at a Ted Cruz rally earlier this year to shoot cars with California license plates. He’s so racist even National Review Online won’t have him anymore. The only place he can work is Fox News. Fred, if you’re gonna post stuff here from trolls, you need to find trolls who are less transparently dishonest.

    Comment by Lex — Monday, August 25, 2014 11:31 am @ 11:31 am | Reply

  5. Lex,

    Call Whittle a dishonest troll , ( someone who disagrees with your narative on any subject ) fine but your anatomical verbal gymnastic metaphors don’t detract from the central point that there is no white on black crime epidemic but to the contrary just the opposite,

    Colin Flaherty ( ” Spike’s Lee War on Black Men and other myths that ignore, deny and encourage racial violence” )

    A bonus video for those not invested in this lie

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Monday, August 25, 2014 7:50 pm @ 7:50 pm | Reply

  6. Fred, I never addressed the question of whether there’s an epidemic of black-on-white crime; I addressed the fact that Whittle was lying and misdirecting on the subject of white-COP-on-black violence. Please keep up.

    Comment by Lex — Monday, August 25, 2014 10:01 pm @ 10:01 pm | Reply

  7. Lex,

    Whittle called me this morming and said that you are lying when you accuse him of lying

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Tuesday, August 26, 2014 11:57 am @ 11:57 am | Reply

  8. Well, Fred, as I noted above, his video speaks for itself. And if he wants to make an issue of it, he knows where to find me.

    Comment by Lex — Tuesday, August 26, 2014 12:01 pm @ 12:01 pm | Reply

  9. Lex said ” I never addressed the question of whether there’s an epidemic of black-on-white crime”

    Okay do you see the need for an honest discussion of this subject ?

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Tuesday, August 26, 2014 1:46 pm @ 1:46 pm | Reply

  10. I’ve seen it for years, but that’s not the subject of this post. The subject of this post is holding those with the power of life and death over their fellow citizens responsible and accountable for their on-the-job actions, be they legal or otherwise.

    Comment by Lex — Tuesday, August 26, 2014 1:51 pm @ 1:51 pm | Reply

  11. Are your blog’s fences so narrow, so restrective that a related subject can’t be discussed. ? What have you seen for years. ? Have you ever expounded on it ?

    Or are you just hesitant to face up to the realities in Flaherty’s and others works .

    Lex said :” The subject of this post is holding those with the power of life and death over their fellow citizens responsible and accountable for their on-the-job actions, be they legal or otherwise.:

    The whole issue of racism – and enabling reverse racism – in America today can be laid firmly at the feet of the mainstream media and the whole billion dollar ‘race baiting’ industry (think Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, etc and the companies they shake down for what is in essence protection money).

    It’s all about racism and feeding the liberal agenda in the media – if no real racial bias or ‘inequality’ exists, they make it up – they have too, otherwise the base of the whole liberal philosophy (religion, really) to collapse. Plus in this example, the local Chief of PD is probably scared witless about creating another riot/race war. Understandable but cowardly.

    Ferguson-like attack in Utah escapes media notice; race bias seen. Discrepancy in attention given to Ferguson’s Michael Brown, Utah’s Dillon Taylor fuels resentment

    ” On the surface, the cases appear nearly identical: Michael Brown and Dillon Taylor, two young, unarmed men with sketchy criminal pasts shot to death by police officers two days apart.

    But while the world knows of the highly publicized situation involving 18-year-old Mr. Brown, whose Aug. 9 death in Ferguson, Missouri touched off violence, protests and an angry national debate, most people outside Utah have never heard of 20-year-old Mr. Taylor.

    Critics say there’s a reason for the discrepancy in media coverage: race. Mr. Brown was black and the officer who shot him was white. Mr. Taylor wasn’t black — he’s been described as white and Hispanic — and the officer who shot him Aug. 11 outside a 7-Eleven in South Salt Lake wasn’t white.

    The perceived double standard is fueling resentment and talk of double standards on conservative talk radio and social media, where the website Twitchy has compiled a list of Twitter comments asking why Mr. Brown’s death has been front-page news for weeks while Mr. Taylor’s was a footnote at best.

    “Black cop kills unarmed white male #DillonTaylor in Utah,” says a Thursday post on Twitter by radio talk-show host Wayne Dupree, who is black. “#LiberalMedia can’t find [their] way to cover the story.”

    A sarcastic Sunday tweet from Valerie said, “CNN Please! We need the name and home address of #DillonTaylor’s killer immediately. Why hasn’t he been arrested??!!!!!”

    From Mark Andersen: “Black cop kills unarmed white male #DillonTaylor in Utah. Where is @TheRevAl, @msnbc and @CNN? Is @DOJgov there? Did @BarackObama speak?”

    And this: “People need to be just as angry over #DillonTaylor murder by a blk officer in Utah. He wasn’t armed!” said NeeNee in a Friday post.

    Critics of the disparity in coverage and outrage said that it is actually the Brown case that is the outlier: Statistics indicate that black-on-black crime is far more common than the case of a white-on-black crime. For homicide, for instance, the FBI in 2012 found that of the 2,648 black murder victims, some 2,412 were killed by fellow blacks and only 193 by whites. (Whites also were likely far more likely to be killed by fellow whites than by members of other races, according to the data.)”

    Hope this helps

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Tuesday, August 26, 2014 3:06 pm @ 3:06 pm | Reply

  12. Fred, I’ve asked all along that commenters try to stick more or less to the topic of the original post and discussion thereof. Statistics related to intra- and interracial crime aren’t remotely close. If you want me to post about something else, fine, but please feel free to re-read About Blog on the Run: Reloaded first. It might save you some time.

    Comment by Lex — Tuesday, August 26, 2014 8:01 pm @ 8:01 pm | Reply

  13. :About your rules.? Are you one of these ?

    Eric-holder-stands-by-controversial-nation-of-cowards-speech/

    In Feb. 2009, in his first speech after taking office, Holder told a crowd gathered at the Justice Department to celebrate Black History Month, “Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot, in things racial we have always been and continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards.”

    Those remarks led to vigorous and divisive debate, with critics saying that Holder’s idea of openly discussing racial issues involved a one-way conversation led by the attorney general and the Obama administration

    Stop ;playing Marqiuees Of Queensbeery unless you want to shy away from relenant topics wherein you have to concede .

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Wednesday, August 27, 2014 12:14 am @ 12:14 am | Reply

  14. Really? After 12 years, countless discussions and almost as countless arguments, you’re gonna play the “chicken” card?

    Fred, to give you the benefit of every possible doubt, I’ll give you this opportunity: Explain to me how the subject to which Whittle wants to change the conversation relates directly to the original subject of this post: the incidence of officer-involved fatalities and the lack of records thereon. If you can convince me there’s a direct connection, we’ll go that way in this thread.

    Comment by Lex — Wednesday, August 27, 2014 8:56 am @ 8:56 am | Reply

  15. Lex,

    I am beyond trying to convince you of just about anything. I don’t know if the lack of stats on police killings is intentional. You are certain. Okay. There are about a million cops in the US. I feel confident of those who kill without clear, unambiguopus justification , that they are held accountable

    ( Fom Mother Jones ::USA Today reported that on average there were 96 cases of a white police officer killing a black person each year between 2006 and 2012, based on justifiable homicides reported to the FBI by local police. As I reported above, the FBI’s justifiable homicides database paints only a partial picture—accounting for cases in which an officer killed a felon. It does not necessarily include cases involving victims like Michael Brown, Eric Garner, and others who were unarmed when confronted by police. The data in this post has been updated with 2012 numbers, and the map has been updated to reflect that certain cases have been closed. )

    Here is something that may support your position and a rebuttal from the cops

    “Former Las Vegas Review-Journal publisher Sherman Frederick tweeted this past week:

    “Escalated police brutality toward blacks today are (sic) rare, not commonplace. Residual fear of a bygone era.”

    Determining if something is rare is a difficult thing because one must decide rarity in comparison with something else.:

    USA Today examined justifiable homcide reports sent to the FBI. It found that over the seven years ending in 2012 a white police officer killed a black person on average twice a week. That number is based on data from only four percent of law enforcement agencies

    About 750 agencies contribute to the database, a fraction of the 17,000 law enforcement agencies in the United States.

    University of South Carolina criminologist Geoff Alpert, who has long studied police use of deadly force, said the FBI’s limited database underscores a gaping hole in the nation’s understanding of how often local police take a life on America’s streets — and under what circumstances.

    ”There is no national database for this type of information, and that is so crazy,” said Alpert. “We’ve been trying for years, but nobody wanted to fund it and the (police) departments didn’t want it. They were concerned with their image and liability. They don’t want to bother with it.”

    Alpert said the database can confirm that a death has occurred but is good for little else.

    “I’ve looked at records in hundreds of departments,” Alpert said, “and it is very rare that you find someone saying, ‘Oh, gosh, we used excessive force.’ In 98.9% of the cases, they are stamped as justified and sent along.”

    Despite those flaws, the FBI records remain the most complete nationwide accounting of people killed by the police.

    The International Association of Chiefs of Police, the nation’s largest group of police officials, has maintained that police use of force is rare. Citing data gathered by the Bureau of Justices Statistics in 2008, the IACP said less than 2% of the 40 million people who had contact with police reported the use of force or threatened use of force.

    “In large part, the public perception of police use of force is framed and influenced by the media depictions which present unrealistic and often outlandish representations of law enforcement and the policing profession,” the group said in a 2012 report”

    Enter Mark Lamont Hill, who took to Twitter to share this insight: Nelpful ??

    “A Black man in America is killed every 28 hours by police or vigilantes. THAT, not rioting, is domestic terrorism…”

    “His numbers might be accurate, but what sort of lunatic or liar would interpret them this way? Every time a black man is killed by a cop he is the victim of terrorism?

    So cops either shouldn’t try to stop black men from committing crimes, or they should, but if they meet lethal resistance they should run away or surrender and die?

    Such an enormous dose of idiocy in that statement, but it’s a notion echoed by many people across the country. The news about Mike Brown’s death prompted a tidal wave of “f**k the police” sentiments from black and white liberals alike.

    Meanwhile, let any one of these cop hating cowards find themselves in a precarious spot, and watch how quickly they dial 911.
    Criticize bad cops all you want, but police do important work under immense stress and pressure. Why is it that we are supposed to “understand” and empathize with looters and rioters, but we can’t give even the slightest bit of slack to men and women who put themselves in harm’s way to keep peace and order in our society?

    Why are we quick to listen to the plight of the carjacker and the drug dealer, so willing to put their behavior in “context,” yet we fail miserably to comprehend the fact that cops — particularly cops in high crime areas — are dealing with domestic abusers, addicts, thieves, murderers, pimps, and the various other dregs of humanity on a daily basis? This might take a toll on your psyche after awhile; perhaps make you jaded, cynical, even bitter. I know it would to me, and I know the police who manage to be decent in spite of it all deserve an immense amount of respect.

    It’s childish and absurd to hate all police. Yes, cops might have a contentious rapport with people in the inner city, but that’s because they are law enforcers, and inner cities have more than their fair share of law breakers. Why do we pin this strained relationship squarely on the police and never spread the blame to people who choose to commit crimes?

    We can hold cops responsible for their mistakes without descending into this sort of juvenile, anarchist madness. A healthy and rational society respects both the law and those entrusted with upholding it.

    I wonder: do the people who seem to oppose the very existence of police officers have a plan B option? We get rid of cops… and then what? Have you guys thought this through at all?

    I didn’t think so”

    ** Check your email
    .

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Wednesday, August 27, 2014 2:38 pm @ 2:38 pm | Reply

  16. This study doesn’t answer your question but at least provides surprising results.

    People Faster to Shoot White Suspects than Black Suspects

    “A new study in the Journal of Experimental Criminology finds in an experiment measuring the reactions of participants to various threatening situations that people tended to pull the trigger faster when confronted by armed white suspects. This sounds counterintuitive to most people (including me). A 2001 Bureau of Justice Statistics report (latest available) analyzed justifiable homicides and noted:

    Felons justifiably killed by police represent a tiny fraction of the total population. Of the 183 million whites in 1998, police killed 225; of the 27 million blacks, police killed 127. While the rate (per million population) at which blacks were killed by police in 1998 was about 4 times that of whites, the difference used to be much wider: the black rate in 1978 was 8 times the white rate.

    The BJS study also found that black suspects were also as likely to shoot at police as be shot at.”

    “This behavioral ‘counter-bias’ might be rooted in people’s concerns about the social and legal consequences of shooting a member of a historically oppressed racial or ethnic group.

    Sometimes a social science study turns up something interesting.”

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Monday, September 8, 2014 1:23 pm @ 1:23 pm | Reply

  17. That’s 15-year-old data. You might want to look at the hard numbers (not so much the editorializing) in this study, which found that in 2012, black people constituted 32.9% of the population of Chicago but 91% of the people killed by police and 28.6% of the people in New York City but 87% of those killed by police (chart, p. 17).

    Comment by Lex — Monday, September 8, 2014 1:49 pm @ 1:49 pm | Reply

  18. I see a lot of ‘dog whistle’ phrases and statements, like ‘extrajudicial’, ‘vigilante groups (really? in 2014?), ‘modern-day lynchings’, ‘black targets’, etc that throw any pretext of impartiality and/or fairness right out the window.

    And when you have to say “how reliable/accurate are your numbers?”….they aren’t.

    In reply, let’s ask – where is the list of murders and violent racially motivated attacks committed on whites by blacks? The data is out there (at least for murders committed by blacks in the commission of other crimes), but no where do we see an attempt by the white community as “extrajudicial” murders of whites by blacks.

    Nor do we see a compare/contrast of these ‘extrajudicial’ murders and ‘lynchings’ of blacks by cops against fatal shootings of white citizens by white cops – nor do we see the ratios of black killings by black cops contrasted with any of the above. And most importantly, we see no comparison of the crime rates committed by black vs white criminals vs. the police fatal shooting rate.

    The lib wackos can toot the racial dog whistles to kingdom come. I say, put your sensitive delicate white head on the line – grab a sign showing your solidarity and go protest in Ferguson, Watts, Compton, Oakland, Atlanta, or Memphis after dark. And let’s see what happens then.

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Tuesday, September 9, 2014 12:22 am @ 12:22 am | Reply

  19. First, you obviously didn’t read the report. If you don’t want to, great, but you don’t then get to complain about what the report lacks. And whether you’ve read the report or not, you also don’t get to posit a causal connection between crimes rates by race of the offender vs. police fatal shooting rate where none exists. It’s like comparing apples and orangutans. (There might be a worthwhile comparison to be made between rates for certain crimes by race of the offender and rates of certain kinds of police fatal shootings, but that isn’t what you’re saying here.)

    And once again, you’re trying to change the subject of this post from killings by cops to black-on-white crime. You’ve asked me to write a post addressing black-on-white crime. As you know, I’m under no obligation to do so, but I’m thinking about the subject and what, if anything, new I might have to offer on it. (“I’m against it” is worthwhile enough but not new.)

    Comment by Lex — Tuesday, September 9, 2014 8:43 am @ 8:43 am | Reply

  20. Lex,

    Contrary to your assertion, I did read a good deal of the report ( 117 pages ) until it became repititious with individual case summaries ( as edited by the authors ). The term executions is overreacing and hyperbolic , intentened to inflame ( as if that were needed ) .A significant number of these encounters began with criminal activity on the part of the deceased and circumstances where the officer( s ) would have been in fear of their lives. No clear cut, cold blooded killing of one person by another deserves to be ignored . Such cases need to be investigated and prosecuted if the evidence warrants. For the record I am against such wanton violence.

    I also read this from Firedoglake/ Malcolm X Grassroots Movement ( from which I suspect you plucked the linked report )

    Operation Ghetto Storm: 313 Extrajudicial Killings of Blacks in 2012

    It just so happens to ask these questions :

    ~ What about intra-communal violence of “Black-on-Black killing?

    ~ How do these numbers compare with the killing of white people?

    And you accuse me of changing the subject. Puleeze !!

    There were not 313 executions ( Webster’s ) of blacks as this study alleges. Closer to zero.

    Here is the message in the Firedoglake post:

    “In their abiding belief that oppression of blacks, Latinos, Muslims and other ‘Others’ will be increasing in the days to come, as well as globally, Kali Akuno advises:

    ‘Oppressed peoples and communities can and will only be secure in this country when they are organized to defend themselves against the aggressions of the government and the forces of white supremacy and capitalist exploitation. “Let Your Motto Be Resistance: A Handbook on Organizing New Afrikan and Oppressed Communities for Self-Defense”,

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Tuesday, September 9, 2014 1:24 pm @ 1:24 pm | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: