Showing posts sorted by relevance for query police. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query police. Sort by date Show all posts

Friday, March 7, 2014

Ohio Police Assist Christian Pastors to Make Religious Propaganda Film

by Nomad


What could be better for a phony war on Christianity than a series of mock arrests of innocent preachers? And even better than that? Why, video taping the staged event- without bothering to tell the congregation- and uploading them to YouTube without any explanation. 
Best of all, the local sheriff and his deputies were more than ready to assist in the making of this propaganda.

During last Sunday's sermon, parishioners  at Greater Bethel Baptist Church in Akron Ohio must have been stunned and outraged as armed deputies from the Summit County Sheriff's office marched into their church.
The members of the congregation were told that the police- with a camera crew in tow- had come to arrest their pastor, Reverend Melford Elliott. Other churches in the area were scenes for more arrests, which included the Rev. Robert Golson, pastor at Prince of Peace Baptist Church; and the Rev. Vincent Peterson, pastor at Providence Baptist Church. In the video, sheriff deputies are shown handcuffing the pastors who continued to preach before placing them in the backs of patrol cars.


Little did any of the church-goers know that they were actually unpaid extras in a staged event, the making of a film, part of a project called "Defending the Faith." The website says that the goal of the dramatization is to make people more aware of what it takes for pastors to defend the Christian faith beyond preaching on Sundays. According one source:
A seven-minute YouTube video created by the KAZ radio television network documents each arrest, with the theme song to the reality legal series "Cops" playing in the background. In each arrest, sheriff's deputies enter the church with the KAZ film crew in tow, approaching the pulpit during the pastor's sermon and telling him he is under arrest for "defending the faith." The pastors go willingly, but often respond by saying they will continue defending their Christian faith until they die.
After the mock arrests, Edra Frazier, marketing coordinator for the project explained to members of the church that the whole thing had been the making of a marketing tool.
Sheriff Steve Barry and his deputies had agreed to participate. Deputies on the video gave realistic interviews, portraying themselves as conflicted about arresting the pastors. It' all very authentic and convincing.
One thing they had forgotten to mention to the police. As part of the marketing, however, the video of the arrests were immediately uploaded with any explanatory information that the events were simulated arrests. 

Monday, April 30, 2018

The Perplexing Case of the Nimer Murders

by Nomad


Back in 2009, I stumbled across this strange story about an investigation of a horrific pair of murders that took a bizarre twist.

two-page article in the September 22 1958 issue of LIFE magazine relates the chilling and bewildering story of the Nimer murder case. The double homicide of Mr. and Mrs. Melvin Nimer of Staten Island, New York, was a sensation at the time. The reason?
The chief suspect in the crime was their eight-year-old son, Melvin Dean Nimer.

The Murders and the Suspicions

Sometime before two in the morning of September 2, 1958, Melvin Nimer and his wife, Lou Jean Nimer were apparently attacked by an armed assailant in their home.

According to their son's initial account, he was awakened in the night to find a masked man attempting to choke him. His parents rushed to his aid and, in the struggle, were stabbed in the struggle. Based on the boy's description, police issued a manhunt for a white male, wearing blue dungarees and a blue print-striped shirt.
But the police officers felt something was not quite right. Given the fact that he had just witnessed the violent deaths of both his parents, his calm behavior seemed suspicious.

Wednesday, January 28, 2015

Detained and Cuffed Traveler Takes on TSA Overreach and Wins 25K Settlement

by Nomad

A five-year legal battle ended last month over the suspicious airport security agents handling of a passenger.  At the heart of the issue: Can there ever be a balance between our security and our civil liberties?


Nick George must feel the sweet satisfaction of closure after a settlement was reached last month  related to an August 2009 incident at a Philadelphia airport. While traveling from Pennsylvania to California George found himself in as absurd and frightening  situation as anything Kafka could have imagined.

Suspicious Minds
On his way to begin his senior year at Pomona College, George caught the attention of security agents at Philadelphia International Airport. As he  passed through the routine screening for his cross-country flight, Transportation Security Authority (TSA) agents asked him to empty his pockets. He was carrying a set of English-Arabic flashcards.

Wednesday, January 31, 2018

How Trump's "Alternative Facts" Fuel His Racist Policies for Urban America

by Nomad


Recent remarks from Trump have reopened accusations of his racism. Yet, looking back to his campaign, Trump's racism has always been on full display, particularly when it came to his views on the urban life.


Throughout his presidential campaign, Trump preferred to paint an ugly portrait of urban life where things were on the verge of collapse and crime was out of control.
In his narrative, things were falling apart in the black community.
Our African-American communities are absolutely in the worst shape that they’ve ever been in before, ever, ever, ever. You take a look at the inner cities, you get no education, you get no jobs, you get shot walking down the street.”

Wednesday, June 11, 2014

Shutting It Down: The Costs of Silencing Occupy Dissent

by Nomad

Protester arrested at Occupy Wall Street Shutting down dissent is costly. After a court ruling this week on police handling of Occupy Wall Street protesters, we learned how much such tactics by law enforcement cost the American taxpayer. Of course, the American taxpayer has had to foot the bill,  not once, but twice.


This week, lawyers for the organization Lawyers for the Rest Of Us. issued a statement announcing the largest settlement to date regarding the Occupy Wall Street protesters and the City of New York. In addition to the public relations nightmare, the city has agreed to pay a staggering out $583,024 to 14 who were falsely arrested. 
On January 1st, 2012, in a federal lawsuit, Peat v. City of New York, 12-cv-8230, filed in the Southern District of New York on November 13, 2012. The lawsuit alleged that the plaintiffs’ Constitutional rights to free speech and assembly were violated by their arrests.
This settlement is notable as it is  the largest single settlement to date for an Occupy Wall Street-related civil rights lawsuit in New York. The details of the case are worth reviewing since it may not be the last of its kind.
The fourteen plaintiffs were arrested at 2nd Avenue and 13th Street in Manhattan during a peaceful march of Occupy Wall Street supporters. At that location, police officers accompanying the march stopped the march from continuing forward and enclosed the marchers within police lines composed of scooter patrol officers and officers on foot. High-ranking NYPD officers, including then-Chief of Patrol James Hall, Deputy Chief Theresa Shortell, Deputy Inspector Daniel O’Donnell, and Captain William Taylor were present at the scene and directly participated in making the arrests.
The plaintiffs were charged with blocking pedestrian traffic under Penal Law 240.20 (disorderly conduct). The District Attorney’s office later declined to prosecute the criminal cases against the plaintiffs.
The point was to get them off the street and, others might say, to intimidate them into silence.

Tuesday, June 4, 2013

Amid Nationwide Protests, Turkish PM Tayyip Erdogan Faces His Moment of Truth


Prime Minister
Recep Tayyip ErdoÄŸan
Events in Turkey took an unexpected turn last week. It may be a bit premature but some are already calling the wave of civil unrest that erupted in every major city- and continue- as “The Turkish Spring.” 

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip ErdoÄŸan and his ruling Islamist Justice and Development Party (AKP) suddenly found themselves the object of public scorn and open revolt. By Friday night and Saturday, demonstrations had begun to spread to every major city and even into small towns and villages. That included the more conservative regions thought to be AKP strongholds.
The most amazing thing of all was how quickly and to what extent things began to unravel.

The Park that Wouldn't Die
For a city with a 3000- year-old history, Istanbul’s Gezi Park -ground zero for this week’s protests -doesn’t have a great deal of historical value. The park, designed as “lungs of the city” was built as part of an earlier urban development plan back in 1939 and was constructed upon the ruins of the Ottoman Artillery Barracks (and before that, an Armenian cemetery.)

For many residents of the area, the park’s value had nothing to do with history. When it was decided that the park had to go in favor of an urban development scheme, they objected on purely environmental grounds, noting that the small park was one of the last remaining green areas in the neighborhood. In addition, they objected to how the decision was made- without any local input- to destroy a park in favor of a shopping mall.


Municipal leaders (all AKP members) and the local police so clumsily handled what had began as a peaceful protest that it unexpectedly led to something that few could have imagined- a national revolt against the ruling party.

After protesters were warned about continuing their camp to defend the park, early Thursday morning police marched in with tear gas and routed the group.
Under police protection, city workers immediately collected the tents and belongings and burned them. When heavy equipment was brought in to begin the park's destruction, the protesters returned to defend the park. This time with additional supporters. In response greater numbers of police, wearing full body armor, were sent in to seal off the area.
In fact, a judge had already issued a halt to the project until the matter could be settled. 

And that was that, so the Istanbul mayor thought, so the police commissioner of the city thought. However, by Friday afternoon, people from all over the city- some even crossing the Bosporus Bridge from the Asian side- marched into the downtown area to join the protesters.

Saturday, November 21, 2015

Fascism Made in the USA: The Night Nazis Fought on the Streets of New York City

by Nomad

1939 Bund Party Rally NYCThe United States has had its share of fascist groups that have come and gone. One of those was the American Nazi Party, the Bund Party. Here's the story of its 1939 rally and how it led to its collapse. 


A "Pro-American" Rally

On The night of 20 February 1939, something occurred that became an interesting footnote in American history. Today it is mostly a forgotten bit of the history of New York City. And for many, it could be a period they would rather not recall.

That evening, Madison Square Garden was the venue for the American- German Bund party Washington's Day celebration, hosted by American-German Bund party. 
You may not be familiar with the Bund party, it was better known as the American Nazi party. 
Advertised as a "Pro-American Rally" it was attended by somewhere between 17,000 and 22,000. It was one of the largest gatherings of American Nazis of its time.

From the photographs of the event, there were the usual Nazi rally fixtures, flags, the swastikas, and uniforms. In order to establish its brand as true blue American, a forty-foot portrait of George Washington graced the stage. That was more than just window dressing. The organization had declared that Washington was "the first Fascist" who did not believe democracy would work. 

The meeting opened with a salute to the flag and the playing of the "Star-Spangled Banner." (It was to end with the Nazi anthem, however.)

Monday, October 29, 2018

From the Archives: When Nazis Marched on the Streets of New York City

by Nomad


Back on November 21, 2015, Nomadic Politics posted an article about a historical event which, at that time, had received very little attention. 

After the election which saw Donald Trump rise to power, quite a few other news outlets recounted the event. Then came the incident in Charlottesville and Trump's attempt to equate Nazi thugs with the people who protested them. Those recent events brought more coverage of the events of 1939. 


In memory of the 11 victims of the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting on Saturday morning, I have decided to reprint this particular post. 
I hope you find it interesting reading.



Fascism Made in the USA: The Night Nazis Fought on the Streets of New York City


The United States has had its share of fascist groups that have come and gone. One of those was the American Nazi Party, the Bund Party. Here's the story of its 1939 rally and how it led to its collapse. 


A "Pro-American" Rally

On the night of 20 February 1939, something occurred that became an interesting footnote in American history. Today it is mostly a forgotten bit of the history of New York City. And for many, it could be a period they would rather not recall.

Wednesday, August 19, 2015

Massacre Classes: Florida Giving Seminars on How to Survive an Active Shooter Event

by Nomad

With all possibility of sensible gun control reform seemingly out of the question, local police departments are providing residents free classes on how to survive an active shooting scenario.


It's a reflection, some would say, on the pathetic state of gun control in the US.
Penny Dickerson of the Daytona Times reports that the local Daytona police department, in conjunction with the Volusia County-Daytona Beach National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the Black ClergyAlliance have begun holding free seminars.
The subject: how to increase your chances of survival when faced with an active shooter.

Monday, December 9, 2013

Henry Wallace and The Last Progressive Party

Henry Wallace Quoteby Nomad

(image courtesy of MoveOn.org)

In the Midst of all These Riches

The quote on the right comes from Henry A. Wallace's book, “Democracy Reborn.”
Today the book is not so easy to find and Wallace's name means very little to most Americans.

Nevertheless, I think the man deserves a little attention because, when you look over his words and ideals, Wallace seems- in some ways- ahead of his time.

For example, he also wrote:
“Still another danger is represented by those who, paying lip service to democracy and the common welfare, in their insatiable greed for money and the power which money gives, do not hesitate surreptitiously to evade the laws designed to safeguard the public from monopolistic extortion."
That sounds achingly familiar to the speeches made during the Occupy movement.

Henry Wallace was the 33rd Vice President of the United States under Franklin Delano Roosevelt. It was the closest he ever got to the White House. Before that, Wallace had served as Secretary of Agriculture during the dust bowl days which saw Americans desperately fighting for survival.

Tuesday, September 19, 2017

Fall of the Emigre: A Second Look at the Mysterious Death of Mikhail Lesin

by Nomad

 Lesin

For those who appreciate a conspiracy theory, the baffling death of Mikhail Lesin is straight out of a John le Carré spy novel. Officially, it was ruled as an accident and yet, given current events, Lesin's demise becomes even more suspicious.


Blunt Force Trauma

When the doors of the luxurious suite at the Doyle Dupont Circle Hotel were opened on the Thursday morning of November 5, 2015, Russian emigre, Mikhail Yuriyevich Lesin was found dead and alone. He was found without any identification in a hotel room that was under his name. Police detected no obvious signs of forced entry.
After some delay, a member from the Russian Embassy in Washington, D.C., confirmed the identity as that of 57-year old Lesin.

Traveling from Los Angeles, Lesin had been invited to attend a fund-raising dinner for the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars at the Ritz-Carlton hotel in the city’s West End two nights before.

However, he had not appeared at the event and had failed to respond to phone calls or text messages from the fellow Russian who had invited him, a banker and philanthropist who was honored at that dinner.
Lesin's failure to attend must have seemed peculiar. He had recently confirmed he would be there and was flying into Washington specifically for the ceremony.

In fact, Lesin had been listed among other numerous guests. It meant, as one investigator points out, that "his potential presence could have been known to a large number of people, not all of whom were necessarily his well-wishers."

Thursday, April 20, 2017

Shared Values: VP Mike Pence's Shameless Human Rights Lies in Indonesia

by Nomad

Mike Pence

Proud to Partner

With all that's been going on lately, you might have missed this story. As part of his Asia tour, Vice-president Mike Pence made a stop in tropical Indonesia.
There, he gave praise to what he described as the world's most populous Muslim nation's Indonesia's democracy and moderate form of Islam. It has been held up- as Turkey once was- as the champion of "a more tolerant and moderate Islam."

Agreeing to boost cooperation between the two nations to fight terrorist extremism, Indonesian President Joko "Jokowi" Widodo welcomed Pence.
The vice president, according to the AP story, was there to reinforce traditional U.S. alliances at a time when Donald Trump's presidency has raised questions about the strength of the U.S. commitment to the region.

Pence said:
"As the second- and third-largest democracies in the world, our two countries share many common values including freedom, the rule of law, human rights and religious diversity. The United States is proud to partner with Indonesia. It promotes and protects these values."
Every American- whatever his politics- has a right to question Pence about which shared values he might be referring to. When you take a close look to the reports of independent human right organizations, Pence's claims look much worse than the typical hyperbolical gloss of honey-coated diplomacy.

It is, in fact, the worst kind of misrepresentation. It is also a shame for any nation that has once held itself as a champion and defender of human rights around the world.

Wednesday, September 17, 2014

Bust: How the Republicans Lost the War on Drugs 1/5

by Nomad

Starting with President Nixon, the War on Drugs has been a series of costly mistakes. Sadly, most of the misjudgements might have been avoided if only officials had listened to the experts and to the people most affected.


Part 1. Nixon, Drugs and the Hippie Removal Scheme

Nixon and the Mandate of the Silent Majority 
To understand what went wrong with America's War on Drugs, we have to go back to the days of President Nixon and the time before Watergate. In this turbulent moment in US history, there was a fundamental difference of opinions about the causes of the upheaval in the 60s.
Taking a look at the nation in turmoil at colleges and universities, President Richard Nixon not long after taking office, said:
It's not too strong a statement to declare that this is the way civilizations begin to die... The process is altogether to familiar to those who would survey the wreckage of history. assault and counterassault, one extreme leading to the opposite extreme; the voices of reason and calm discredited.
(As it turned out, it was a oddly accurate assessment and it is even more true today than then.) 
At the time many people, especially conservatives, considered the liberal policies of the 1960s, particularly, domestic programs of the Great Society, to be a failure. The Supreme Court decisions, on abortion and civil rights, combined with liberal idealism had opened a Pandora's box. That was what a lot of middle class people across the country genuinely believed.   

The rebellious counter-culture, which included the hippies, the yippies, the anti-war protesters, the bra burners, the liberationists, the anarchists, the Communists,  was fueled not by resentment or by anger at injustice. Drugs had to be behind it all. What else could make kids from well-off backgrounds, drop out of society, throw away all of the material advantages and live like gypsies? What else could make them so wild and violent?
That view was both widespread and often propagated by the mainstream news media. The conventional wisdom said that the widespread use of illegal drugs was just another example of the general breakdown of law and order.  

Wednesday, April 4, 2012

Strip Search: the Supreme Court's Attack on the Fourth Amendment

nude- nomadic politicsby Nomad
In yet another questionable ruling, the Supreme Court has decided in a 5-4 vote that police departments have every right to demand a strip search from any person they arrested, even for minor offenses, “before admitting them to jails even if the officials have no reason to suspect the presence of contraband.” 
To clarify (somewhat) the meaning of the terms: According to Daphne Ha, writing for the Fordham Law Review:

A strip search is “[a] search of a person conducted after that person’s clothes have been removed, the purpose usu[ally] being to find any contraband the person might be hiding.”
Strip searches generally do not involve scrutiny of body cavities. However, policies in correctional facilities tend to include visual body cavity searches under the broad term “strip searches,” and only distinguish between visual and physical body cavity searches. This definitional problem is aggravated when courts describe strip search policies without clarifying whether a search includes a visual search of body cavities.

Monday, February 6, 2017

Up the Rates: How Zimbabwe's Mugabe Found a Simple Way to Crush Organized Dissent

by Nomad


Zimbabwe's autocratic leader, Mugabe, has found a way to nip popular uprising in the bud by jacking up the price of mobile phone service. 


Zimbabwe's Proud Hitler

Mortality, not morality, is generally the enemy of even the most long-lived autocrat. If they survive assorted assassins or popular uprisings, eventually, Mother Nature and Father Time team up and end a dictator's pretty dreams of absolute oppression.

For the average Zimbabwean, it must be a little hard to maintain patience. The increasingly frail 92-year-old Robert Mugabe has hung onto power through the use of dubious election tactics, divisive politics and outright brutality since the days of Ronald Reagan.
One man rule of Mugabe is, therefore, something Zimbabweans have grown extremely weary of. They have every reason to be. Robert Mugabe and his dismal record do nothing to increase Zimbabwe's international prestige.

Sunday, October 25, 2015

Meaningless Mea Culpa: All about Tony Blair's Dishonest Apology for the Iraq War

by Nomad


Blair UK Prime Minister IraqFormer British Prime Minister Tony Blair finally made an apology. To many, it was a startling admission. In fact, it was typical Blair, saying so much and yet saying nothing. He told CNN:
“I apologise for the fact that the intelligence we received was wrong. I also apologise for some of the mistakes in planning and, certainly, our mistake in our understanding of what would happen once you removed the regime.”
Sorry may be the hardest word but not for Tony Blair. That's what "whoops" sounds like in England I suppose. Still, we really need to look a little closer at Blair's barring of soul.  

Thursday, November 27, 2014

The Other Side of Anger: The East St. Louis Race Riots of 1917

by Nomad

A century, in the summer of 1917, East St. Louis was rocked by a race riot that has today been largely forgotten. It was, in many ways, a classic example of how things between the majority and the minority can quickly get out of control.

Exodus from the South

It is the summer of 1917 and the place is East St. Louis.
For the black laborer, the conditions in the Deep South, with its Jim Crow laws and the prevailing atmosphere of oppression, offered very little enticement to stay. Despite federal laws which were supposed to provide equal protection and due process, the African American in the South at that time was considered a second-class citizen.

As one source points out, all Southern states had some form of Jim Crow laws. Segregation was a way of life for black in the South, affecting every social activity, not merely schools, but also in restaurants, theaters, parks, and hospitals. All these restrictions were held in place by a justice system that favored the white race in every way. And when injustice was challenged, the KKK was on hand to provide the intimidation to keep the "coloreds" in line.

It was a time of great demographic changes. Around 1910, African Americans had constituted more than half the population of South Carolina and Mississippi, and more than 40 percent in Georgia, Alabama, Texas, and Louisiana. The Black exodus had rendered the South essentially without a labor force. In the North, cities that once been virtually all white at the turn of the century now became centers of urban black culture.

Factories in the North offered great opportunities for men willing to work, especially in 1917 with America about to enter the World War. Between the years 1916 through 1918, an estimated 400,000 African Americans left the South in to take advantage of a labor shortage in the wake of the First World War.

During that spring, African Americans from the South were moving to St. Louis at the rate of 2,000 a week. And this influx presented the Northern manufacturers an ultra-cheap source of labor. That was to prove to be an excellent bargaining chip against unhappy union workers.

Unions vs Management

At the same time, workers unions were embroiled in labor disputes not only in the US but globally. Among the demands, workers were attempting to establish a fair wage, the right to collective bargaining, an eight-hour work day, increased worker safety and job security. Across the nation, unions were attempting to assert their dominance over industry.

With wartime demands for industrial production increased, the timing for workers couldn't have been any better. If industrialists were going to get rich, then workers believed that they had every right to demand their own share. Added to that, union leaders understood that conscription for military service was bound to create a shortage of civilian manpower. The time to seize the moment was now.

For the corporation owner, therefore, the black migration -cheap labor that would accept whatever conditions and at whatever wages that company owners offered- was one sure way that they could break the power of the largely white unions. since the Industrial revolution began the one tactic that has long become fool-proof is to pit worker against worker. In the 1917 case, the plan was to pit white union labor and black easily-exploitable labor.

When 470 African American workers were hired to replace striking white workers at the Aluminum Ore Company in East St. Louis, the stage was set for a war between the races. The strike. which included, at least, half of the company's workforce, had already gone on for several weeks.

It was one of a series of labor actions in the area that had weakened the power of the unions. These companies were now in the power position and felt no need to arbitrate.

The hatred for corrupt management and greedy company owners swiftly turned into racial hatred for the black "scabs."

That discord was, historians have noted, largely stirred up by management that was in no mood to negotiate. Government orders meant profits and these dangerous combined factors would soon erupt into all-out calamity.

The book, Power, Community, and Racial Killing in East St. Louis, author Malcolm McLaughlin. points to the tactics (along with collaboration with local government) as the chief factor for the racial violence to come. The war allowed the industrialists to identify their own interests with the interests of the nation at war. Striking workers were portrayed as un-American. Any tactic to break the strike was considered fair.

The company had also, McLaughlin also notes, employed professional strikebreakers, armies of thugs and armed them with secretly-obtained US government issued rifles. The company had apparently received the rifles from a local gun club set up by Estes Sorrell, the secretary of the Chamber of Commerce. McLaughlin speculates that the club was specifically intended as a means of gun running since the rifles appeared at the Aluminum Ore plant, packed and ungreased.

Rumblings Before the Eruption

Tensions were reaching a breaking point. On May 10, union leaders warned local government that something had to be done about the black workers taking white jobs. They threatened to take action themselves if nothing was done.

Eventually, on May 28th, 1917- just weeks after America had entered the war, the spark caught fire and the race riots of East St. Louis exploded. Formal complaints about black workers were lodged with the Mayor of East St. Louis Fred Mollman by furious whites. 

A month earlier Mayor Mollman had won re-election on a promise to clean up the city. He had also assured black voters that black police officers would be hired and a new firehouse would be built for black neighborhoods. White voters were also furious when Mollman threw a post-election party with hundreds of black supporters. 

The mayor assured the angry white crowd that he had a plan to handle the Negro problem. However the remarks of another speaker, a white lawyer, that struck an ominous note. He told the crowd that "there's is no law against mob violence." 
It was exactly the wrong thing to say and the worst message to give.

Immediately after the meetings, with passions running high, a rumor was circulated about a white man being robbed by an armed African-American. Mobs of angry white civilians gather and set off a rampage through the downtown, assaulting all blacks they could find. African Americans were pulled off trolleys and beaten on the street.

Critics claimed that the police were more interested in disarming the black residents instead of protecting lives and property.
This violent episode was brought to an end only when Illinois governor Frank Lowden called out the National Guard to restore calm.

Had the governor followed up with a thorough investigation and prosecution of transgressors along with preventative measures, the situation could have been resolved. 
However, in the month that followed, the riot was all but forgotten while the simpering underlying causes remained. As one source notes:
No precautions were taken to ensure white job security or to grant union recognition. This further increased the already-high level of hostilities towards African Americans. No reforms were made in police force which did little to quell the violence in May.
When Governor Lowden ordered the National Guard out of the city on June 10th, the black residents of the city faced the situation alone. 
During this time, the strike was officially called off two weeks later, all that was left of the labor action was a bitter resentment that demanded its expression in violence.


The Slaughter of the Innocents

On July 2, 1917, an automobile driven by white males passing through a black neighborhood, firing shots at African Americans. 
Not long afterward, black residents mistook another car carrying a journalist and two police officers for the same attackers and fired shot at the passing vehicle, killing both police.

Later that day, thousands of white residents gathered on the scene to view the blood-stained auto. The crowds then turned and marched into the black parts of town, reportedly beating any African American they found along the way - including women and children.

Professor Elliot Rudwick's 1964 book Race Riot at East St. Louis, July 2, 1917, provides an insight to the terrible night. After cutting fire department water hoses, white rioters torched entire black neighborhoods of the city and shot at residents as they attempted to escape. 

Several innocent African Americans were lynched by the mobs.
Guardsmen were called in but accounts exist that they joined in the rioting rather than stopping it. More joined in, including allegedly "ten or fifteen young girls about 18 years old, [who] chased a negro woman at the Relay Depot at about 5 o'clock. The girls were brandishing clubs and calling upon the men to kill the woman."
Some unverified reports claimed that "black women were stripped by white women for the amusement of the crowd." 

Troops were ordered not to shoot rioters and a number of rifles were stolen from the soldiers. When squads of soldiers were sent out to round up firearms, it was clear that both sides were well-armed. 

One Col. S. O. Tripp of the Illinois Guard came out as a hero of the hour when he rescued an elderly black man from a lynching party of hundreds. The black man, with a rope around his neck, was being dragged through a street by more than a hundred men. Col. Tripp forced his way through the crowd and demanded the crowd release the man. 
Such acts of heroism were not common and later, as the details emerged, the actions of National Guard on that night would seem anything but heroic. 

According to one account at the time, African Americans were "being shot down like rabbits" and hanged to telegraph poles in the south end of the town. Other reliable reports counted nineteen black corpses on a side street. 

Throughout the night of July 2, the atrocities against black Americans continued despite the presence of patrolling Guardsmen. In addition, high winds spread the flames engulfing three different parts of the city. 

In the early hours of the following morning, leaders of the black community gathered together to make an appeal directly to President Wilson and to the Illinois governor. They demanded increased security for the black population under mortal threat. The total number of Guardsmen was 1.500, but officials conceded that that number would not be enough to restore order. 
Here's how one reporter described the scene the following morning.
Estimates of the number of dead varied widely from 25 to 250. At 9:30 o'clock 24 bodies had been recovered, including three whites, 74 wounded negros were found.

Estimate of the bodies supposed to lie under the acres of ashes and smouldering debris, where fires consumed hundreds of negro shacks and house last night run into the hundreds.

Keeping Out of Sight 

The morning brought some degree of calm to the city. Exhausted Guardsmen patrolled the streets while many black residents driven from their homes huddled together "seemingly anxious to keep out of sight." 


Six thousand blacks were left homeless and five hundred men women and children had been forced to spend the night in the city jail. presumably, the only place that would provide any degree of security.

Otherwise. said the reporter,  the city appeared normal. There were broken windows here and there, other wreckage and the breeze carried the acrid smell of water-soaked embers.

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) dispatched two representatives, W.E.B. DuBois, and Martha Gruening, to investigate the events. Silent marches of 10,000 were held in New York City in silent protests for what black leaders were calling a "massacre."

In the days after the event, there was a national outcry for those responsible to held to account. including the police commission and other government officials. Closer to home, however, it was a different story. 
In the days following the riots, the city's whites exhibited little regret. Many toured downtown, which buzzed with a mardi-gras environment, showing off mementos that they had gathered during the unrest (mainly pieces of clothing from dead bodies). They also blamed their black neighbors for the July 2 disturbance.
Collins also points out that when justice finally came, it was the based on a surreal version of impartiality.
A grand jury eventually handed down indictments to 134 people, about one-third of them black. Most of the whites paid a small fine or spent a few days in jail. Six substantial trials stemmed from the riot- four involving whites and two blacks. Nine whites and twelve blacks served time in prison.

The Garvey Indictment

The controversial and charismatic Marcus Garvey, the president of the Universal Negro Improvement Association (UNIA) delivered a speech on July 8, less than a week later. 
His words were unambiguous calling what had taken place as "one of the bloodiest outrages against mankind for which any class of people could be held guilty."

It was, he said,  "no time for fine words, but a time to lift one's voice against the savagery of a people who claim to be the dispensers of democracy."
“This is a crime against the laws of humanity; it is a crime against the laws of the nation, it is a crime against Nature, and a crime against the God of all mankind.”
He did not blame just the individuals involved, but Garvey indicted the entire system:
For three hundred years the Negroes of America have given their life blood to make the Republic the first among the nations of the world, and all along this time there has never been even one year of justice but on the contrary a continuous round of oppression.
Quoting   Acts 17:26, Garvey said that  God has created "of one blood all nations of men to dwell on the face of the earth." Yet, it was the white race that was determined "to enslave, conquer and rob the rights of the Peaceful."
Through that system of enslavement, conquest and robbery, the black man was taken into this country where he was forced against his will to labor for the enrichment of the white man. Millions of our people in the early days of slavery gave their lives that America might live. From the labours of these people the country grew in power, until her wealth to-day is computed above that of any two nations.
In spite of this inarguable contribution to the American success story, the Negro race was still "a despised creature in the eye of the white people." How else can the massacre in East St.Louis be explained?

"The white man," Garvey told the crowd, "has never found it convenient to live up to the principles of brotherhood which he himself teaches to all mankind." 

In that speech, Garvey also outlined a conspiracy against African Americans who had abandoned the brutal oppression of the South in a bid for their fair share of prosperity and a better life in the North. He took direct aim at East St. Louis Mayor Mollman. 
"I am convinced that he fostered a well arranged conspiracy to prevent black men migrating from the South much the loss of Southern Farmers who for months have been moving heaven it seems to prevent the exodus of the labor serfs of the South into the North."
He accused Mollman of doing "absolutely nothing to let the people know that the law would be enforced to preserve order and ensure the peaceful lives of the black people."
The authorities instead of attempting to keep law and order had simply stood by and watched.
We have a police department that is incompetent and inefficient if not worse. Not only was the word sent out that law would not be rigidly enforced but the impression was allowed to spread that law violations would be winked at."
There were reports, Garvey said, that the East St. Louis mayor had been contacted by representatives from the South to see what could be done about the black migration.
As proof of the conspiracy, Garvey also cited a message from Legislature of Georgia that "their good Negroes must come home as they will treat them better than East St. Louis did." 

In one day, Garvey said, the mayor of East St. Louis succeeded in driving out a black population in fear of their lives in the face of a white mob. he promised that he would do all he could to discourage Negroes from Louisiana going into East St. Louis as the city did not want them. 
The South was, he said, wild about the "splendid performance."

 *   *   *
Within a month, insurance companies in East St. Louis were canceling policies on property owned by African Americans, in advance of the National Guards eventual departure. 
According to an article in the St. Louis Argus for July 20th, landlords were rumored to be demanding tenants leave and that certain time payment furniture houses were offering to take back partially paid for furniture and refund amount advanced. The same article noted that Illinois Senator Lawrence Sherman was warning the Senate that the rioting was likely to erupt again unless a Congressional committee was formed to investigate the incident.

The message to black residents was clear: they were not safe and they were not wanted. Go back to where you came from.

Committee Hearings

By August of 1917, the United States House of Representatives formed a special Committee investigation of the East St. Louis Race Riots. It came at the request of President Wilson. He wrote a letter to Congress declaring it was "a very serious thing for the whole Nation that anything of the sort that happened in East St. Louis should be possible." 

The committee was charged with reporting the causes that led to the murdering, the lynching, the burning, and the drowning of innocent citizens. The testimony of witnesses presented the Congressmen with horrors that could not be ignored. One witness gave his own account of victims begging for mercy at the hands of a mob gone utterly insane. as well as death by stoning and African Americans randomly being burned alive.
Black skin, a witness told the Congressmen, was a death warrant. 

Another witness stated that the white mob could be a "frugal" lot as well. After shattering the windows of a black residents, white mobs would then loot homes and would remove "every useful piece of furniture, especially if they were large pieces, and carried them to the homes of the poorer whites."

(The complete report was held under seal by the U.S. Government as "classified information" and the U.S. Government did not declassify this report until 1986.) 

The definitive findings of the committee revealed gross negligence of the National Guard and the St. Louis police force. They had not, the report said, acted adequately during the riots, revealing that the police often fled from the scenes of murder and arson. Others had deserted the station houses and refused to answer calls for help. 

In short, law and order were essentially non-existent when it came to protecting the black population on that fateful night. The result as one witness observed was a spectacle worthy of the barbarity of the Roman Coliseum, except, in this case, the white mob had "become were their own gladiators and their own wild beasts."

The Echoes of the Race Riots

In 1918, Representative Leonidas C. Dyer, a Republican from Saint Louis, Missouri introduced the Dyer Anti-Lynching Bill. Dyer had been on the Committee and had been appalled at the race riots. Th bill was an attempt to punish lynchings and mob violence. The legislation would have made lynching a federal felony, thereby overcoming any question of state jurisdiction. 

The draft bill not only demanded punishment for perpetrators but also  prescribed a maximum of 5 years in prison for "any state or city official who had the power to protect a person in his jurisdiction but failed to do so or who had the power to prosecute those responsible and failed to do so."
There was more. 

A $10,000 fine was to be paid by the county in which the lynching took place, to be turned over to the victim’s family. If the victim was seized in one county and killed in another, both counties were to be fined.
 States, especially in the South at that time seldom prosecuted lynchings and they claimed that the prosecution of mob violence including lynchings was a matter of states to decide. 
Congressional Record also showed that senators defended lynching on the grounds that it helped control what they characterized as a threat to white women and also served to keep the races separate.

The bill was passed by a large majority in the House of Representatives, however, the legislation was blocked by a filibuster each time it was put up for a vote.  The opposition was led by the South.

Ninety percent of all lynchings occurred in the Southern states Mississippi, Georgia, Texas, Louisiana, and Alabama furnished nearly half the total victims. Before the civil rights era- which radically changed the direction and agenda of the Democratic party, the South was firmly in the hands of the white ultra-conservative Democrats. 

This faction effectively prevented the passage of the anti-lynching each time the matter came up. 1922, in 1923 and once more in 1924. Each time, Southern Senators replied that they could their own affairs pretty well without Federal interference.

 

In June of 2005, the US Senate formally apologized for its failure to enact anti-lynching bills. Between the years 1882- 1968, nearly 200 anti-lynching laws were drafted. Of those, only three passed the House vote. All of them died in the Senate, a result of the Southern Democratic opposition. 

(That political trend continued until the Democrats under President Eisenhower who challenged the segregation policies of the South. The civil rights policies of Democrat Presidents Kennedy and Johnson ended the Southern conservative wing of their party and today, thanks to the Southern Strategy of Nixon and Reagan, the South is firmly in the hands of the Republican party.) 

Even in 2005, the vote to apologize for the failure was not unanimous. Two Senators from Mississippi, Republicans Trent Lott and Thad Cochran.refused to sign.

Before the Endless Loop

Marcus Garvey once said that the function of the Press was public service "without prejudice or partiality, to convey the truth as it is seen and understood without favoritism or bias."

Today, we have the 24/7 news cycle which may show a glimpse of the truth (when it wishes) but it is rarely the whole truth. Today we have cameras in helicopters soaring over crowds of angry protesters. Close ups of furious African American faces, shouting and holding up handwritten signs. Today CNN reports can show live shots of buildings aflame and National Guard troops in full uniform firing tear gas canisters into silhouetted crowds. We see an endless loop of shots of black residents breaking into shops and carrying out whatever they get a hold of.

Back in 1917, none of this technology existed, of course, and the news coverage of the events in East St. Louis was limited to a small item at the bottom of a page. In the East St. Louis incident, there were practically no photographs of the atrocities and the few that were taken were not flashed every hour to a disgusted public. 

All and all, that's a lucky thing for the white race. Without a mirror, it's so easy to forget what one looks like.