---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 10:32 PM
Subject: Re: Famous Black journalist in disagreement over my stance on inter-racial marriage...
James Meredith and the University of Mississippi
In September of 1962, James Meredith sought to enroll as the first black student in the history of the University of Mississippi (Ole Miss). His enrollment triggered substantial resistance from the University, the community of Oxford Mississippi, and the Governor of the state, Ross Barnett. As a result, President John F. Kennedy ordered federal marshals to ensure Meredith's right to enroll and to protect him as he moved to the campus. On the evening of the Meredith's enrollment, President John F. Kennedy spoke to the American people in a live television address.
As Kennedy was speaking, violence broke out on the campus and in Oxford. President Kennedy ultimately ordered federal troops to Oxford to quell the riots which injured over 300 and killed two.
"Project C" was the name given to the plan devised by Martin Luther King and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference to challenge the system of segregation in Birmingham, Alabama. The "C" in the project stood for confrontation, the strategy of nonviolent direct action designed to confront segregation through peaceful demonstrations, rallies, boycotts, and appeals to justice. This strategy actually hinged upon the anticipated reaction of Police Commissioner Bull Connor. Leaders reasoned that the response of Connor and the police would be to suppress the demonstrations, quite likely through violent means. If so, this response to peaceful protest would attract national attention and create public sympathy for the cause of desegregation.
The leaders reasoned correctly. The response of Bull Connor was as expected. Police dogs and fire hoses were used to disperse the demonstrators. Martin Luther King was arrested by Birmingham policy on Good Friday, April 12, 1963. During his stay in jail, the white ministers of Birmingham churches wrote and urged King to call off the demonstrations and boycotts. The following was King's response:
June 11, 1963
George Wallace Stands in the "School House Door"
Desegregating the University of Alabama
In 1963, the governor of Alabama was George Wallace. He had run for and won the office on the slogan of "segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." In June of 1963, a federal court barred any state government interference with the enrollment of two black students, Vivian Malone and James Hood, at the University of Alabama. Despite this order, Governor George Wallace appointed himself the temporary University registrar and stood in the doorway of the administration building to prevent the students from registering. In response, President Kennedy federalized the Alabama National Guard. One hundred guardsman escorted the students to campus and their commander, General Henry Graham, ordered George Wallace to "step aside." Thus were the students registered.
June 11, 1963
John F. Kennedy Submits Civil Rights Legislation
On the same evening, President Kennedy addressed the public in a speech broadcast by all television networks. It was clear break with JFK's prior and lukewarm position on civil rights. The bill that he submitted to Congress was ultimately passed as the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Transcript of JFK's Speech on Civil Rights
(Real Audio version of the speech also available)
June 12, 1963
The Assassination of Medgar Evers
One day after Kennedy's landmark speech, violence struck again. The place was Jackson, Mississippi. The field secretary for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), Medgar Evers, was leading a protest against Jackson's system of segregation. That evening, Evers arrived home, stepped out of his car, and was shot in the back. He died on his driveway with his wife and children looking on.
Medgar Evers Byron De La Beckwith (1963 & 1994) Bobby DeLaughter
The assassin was white supremacist Byron De La Beckwith, a member of the Ku Klux Klan and a man with an intimidating and violent personality. Beckwith was arrested, tried, and acquitted by an all white jury. Years later, in 1994, Assistant District Attorney, Bobby DeLaughter, reopened the case. This led to a retrial in which the jury convicted Beckwith, 31 years after the act, of assassinating Medgar Evers. The story of Beckwith's second trial is the subject of the 1996 film entitled Ghosts of Mississippi.
August 28, 1963
The March on Washington
To pressure the government and Congress to act more quickly on the civil rights agenda, a massive march on the nation's capital was planned, scheduled, and carried out on August 28th, 1963. According to estimates, over 250,000 participated in the peaceful demonstration which culminated in the speech given by Reverend Martin Luther King.
September 15, 1963
On Sunday morning, September 15, 1963, a bomb exploded in the 16th Street Baptist church in Birmingham, Alabama. The explosion killed four young girls who were in the church for Sunday school and injured another 20 people.
The FBI sent agents to investigate and four suspects were identified. The Birmingham office of the FBI recommended that the four be prosecuted. However, the Director of the FBI, J. Edgar Hoover, refused and claimed that civil rights activists themselves bombed the church to gain public sympathy. The FBI initially closed the case in 1968.
The suspects were four members of the Ku Klux Klan. It took nearly 40 years for them to be brought to justice. Local prosecutors reopened the case and one suspect, Robert "Dynamite Bob" Chambliss, was convicted of murder in 1977. Herman Cash died in 1994 as charges against him were being prepared. On May 1, 2001, a Birmingham jury convicted Thomas Blanton (62 years old at the time of the trial) on four counts of murder. Finally, on May 22, 2002, a jury convicted Bobby Frank Cherry (now 71 years old) of the murders. Both Blanton and Cherry were sentenced to life in prison.
"Dynamite" Bob Chambliss Thomas Blanton Bobby Frank Cherry
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 8:02 PMSubject: Re: Famous Black journalist in disagreement over my stance on inter-racial marriage...
From: Denver Media Service <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 3:37 PM
Subject: Re: Famous Black journalist in disagreement over my stance on inter-racial marriage...
To: ReportersNotebookemail@example.com"However, I do not approve of people marrying outside their race, and I think people are weird who do not want their children and grandchildren to be of their racial lineage." - Elizabeth WrightMike, Wright's above statement/belief reveals what one needs to know about Elizabeth Wright:Ms. Wright needs a one-way ticket to Israel where she can flock together with the folks who really, really, really like Elizabeth's notion of maintaining a racially-pure family and state. Perhaps Ms. Wright can find the kind of genealogical singularity she craves in Israel. Perhaps she could have an operation on her eyes to make them slanted and get a Japanese makeover and go join the racially-pure Japanese, posing as a Japanese.Or perhaps Ms. Wright could build herself a time machine, go back in time far enough for her to jump in a Civil Rights March with Dr. Martin Luther King. Maybe between marches she can clue Dr. King in on her desire for racial purity. I wonder how far that would get Ms. Wright with Dr. Martin Luther King.Somebody stop me................Ms. Wright: please step out of the car and surrender your Black License. You've been driving around here secretly wishing for racial purity: Hey, why's a white guy always gotta meddle in our stuff? Besides, the native Africans who sold your black African ancestors to greedy racist white folks shared your racial lineage - so what? Are you claiming them your brothers too? With ancestors like that, who wants to claim "racial lineage?"Damn White Dude with black daughter, : .r o nSent: Monday, April 11, 2011 12:18 PMSubject: Famous Black journalist in disagreement over my stance on inter-racial marriage...On Apr 9, 2011, at 11:07 PM, Michael wrote:
Elizabeth,Would it be okay for this private e-mail to be public about your views from a Black woman's prospective? Or you would rather not?=========
Michael,I don't mind at all if you publish my remarks, except that I had already begun to send you another email, right after I sent that one, with further response to your initial remarks. This is what I had to say:The reason I asked if you were being ironic is due to your mention of "freedom of association." Has it escaped your notice that due to the perversion of "civil rights" designed especially to accommodate blacks, a whole lot of freedom of association has gone down the drain? What do you call that outrageous forced busing period where black children were forced to chase white children all over town throughout this country, so that whites could not have the freedom to choose their children's schools? What would you call all the many attempts to intrude even into private organizations, to prevent whites from working and socializing among themselves? And what do you think Eric Holder's testy worrying over the fact that, although whites might work with blacks during the week, they don't hang out with them on "Saturday and Sunday," as he put it? See my two posts on this:Outfoxing forced inclusionSolving the problem of virtual segregationYour other comment about this being the "year 2011," implying that attitudes simply must change as time goes on, really rankles me. If I consider something to be an Eternal Truth, who is to tell me that I must keep up with the times, as determined by a bunch of "progressives"? In that light, the Roman Catholic Church should certainly consider what year it is and dump so much of its "old-fashioned" doctrine, beginning with advocacy of the Virgin Birth. After all, it's 2011.For an idea of how blacks might have handled their affairs, beginning in the 1960s, and would have, were it not for integration-crazy white and black elites, see my article at Alternative Right:The Civil Rights MythIntegration & the End of Black Self-RelianceRegards,Elizabeth========On Apr 9, 2011, at 9:18 AM, Elizabeth Wright <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:Michael,I certainly do not think interracial marriage should be illegal. That would make no sense, and would probably instigate more of it.However, I do not approve of people marrying outside their race, and I think people are weird who do not want their children and grandchildren to be of their racial lineage. The fact that people "date" outside their group is meaningless -- socializing is one thing, but marriage is another.Regards,Elizabeth========
On Apr 8, 2011, at 11:53 AM, ReporterNotebook wrote:
Elizabeth,I am not being ironic. I have dated many black women and I would not get bent out of shape if my kids married outside their faith or racial stock. Black, Jewish or whatever!Don't you feel the same? Or a better question: You don't think it should be illegal?
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Elizabeth Wright <email@example.com> wrote:
Are you just being facetious? Otherwise, why are you making an issue of this subject? Why should you care one way or the other? Why so indignant? Or are you just being ironic?
E-mail me anything: