As we approach the Omowale Malcolm X Observance taking place on Umoja-day (Sun) 23rd February with Bro. Ldr. Mbandaka delivering the keynote address on the theme Ten Point Plan for Future Leaders: Transforming the Next Generation, at the Chestnuts Community Centre, 280 St Ann’s Road, Tottenham, London N15 5BN (https://www.alkebulan.org/omx-observance-6260/), we find the Netflix docu-series Who Killed Malcolm X currently creating a buzz. However, it’s a subject that Afrika Speaks on Galaxy Radio dealt with five years ago, featuring Baba Zak Kondo, author of Conspiracys: Unravelling the Assassinationof Malcolm X, one of the foremost authorities in the world on this issue (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jd0AqNeTg5s) and we certainly encourage the community to listen again.
In his book, Baba Zak ultimately concludes:
“We must keep pushing and publicly reveal the murder for what it fundamentally was a U.S. Government conspiracy, and identify all persons responsible for the murder so that they may be punished. This is only just and fair. Besides, Malcolm earned this consideration. For as Eric Norden contends: MALCOLM NEVER RECEIVED JUSTICE INN LIFE, HE DEMANDS IT IN DEATH.” (1)
So although the 1965 murder was a “U.S. Government” operation, this clearly did not mark the end of their efforts, not least because the ‘cubs of Omowale’ (US, Black Panthers, SNCC, etc) were making inroads to the extent that they were regarded as “the greatest threat to the internal security of the country.” (2) This was typified in directives from the director of the FBI, J Edgar Hoover:
“SAC, Albany, August 25, 1967
PERSONAL ATTENTION TO ALL OFFICES
[From] Director, FBI
COUNTERINTELLIGENCE PROGRAM
BLACK NATIONALIST – HATE GROUPS
INTERNAL SECURITY
[…] The purpose of this new counterintelligence endeavor is to expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit, or OTHERWISE NEUTRALIZE [emphasis added] the activities of black nationalist hate-type organizations and groupings, their leadership, spokesmen, membership, and supporters, and to counter their propensity for violence and civil disorder. The activities of all such groups of intelligence interest to the Bureau must be followed on a continuous basis so we will be in a position to promptly take advantage of all opportunities for counterintelligence and inspire action in instances where circumstances warrant. The pernicious background of such groups, their duplicity, and devious maneuvers must be exposed to public scrutiny where such publicity will have a neautralizing effect. Efforts of the various groups to consolidate their forces or to recruit new or youthful adherents must be frustrated. NO OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE MISSED TO EXPLOIT THROUGH COUNTERINTELLIGENCE TECHNIQUES THE ORGANIZATIONAL AND PERSONAL CONFLICTS OF THE LEADERSHIPS OF THE GROUPS AND WHERE POSSIBLE AN EFFORT SHOULD BE MADE TO CAPITALIZE UPON EXISTING CONFLICTS BETWEEN COMPETING BLACK NATIONALIST ORGANIZATIONS. [emphasis added] When an opportunity is apparent to disrupt or NEUTRALIZE [emphasis added] black nationalist, hate-type organizations through the cooperation of established local news media contacts or through such contact with sources available to the Seat of Government [Hoover’s office], in every instance careful attention must be given to the proposal to insure the targetted group is disrupted, ridiculed, or discredited through the publicity and not merely publicized…
You are also cautioned that the nature of this new endeavor is such that UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD THE EXISTENCE OF THE PROGRAM BE MADE KNOWN OUTSIDE THE BUREAU [emphasis added] and appropriate within-office security should be afforded to sensitive operations and techniques considered under the program.
No counterintelligence action under this program may be initiated by the field without specific prior Bureau authorization.
______________
COUNTERINTELLIGENCE PROGRAM
BLACK NATIONALIST – HATE GROUPS
RACIAL INTELLIGENCE
[3/4/68]
GOALS:
For maximum effectiveness of the Counterintelligence Program, and to prevent wasted effort, long-range goals are being set.
1. Prevent the COALITION of militant black nationalist groups. In unity there is strength; a truism that is no less valid for all its triteness. An effective coalition of black nationalist groups might be the first step toward a real “Mau Mau” [Black revolutionary army] in America, the beginning of a true black revolution.
2. Prevent the RISE OF A “MESSIAH” who could unify, and electrify, the militant black nationalist movement. Malcolm X might have been such a “messiah;” he is the martyr of the movement today. Martin Luther King, Stokely Carmichael and Elijah Muhammed all aspire to this position. Elijah Muhammed is less of a threat because of his age. King could be a very real contender for this position should he abandon his supposed “obedience” to “white, liberal doctrines” (nonviolence) and embrace black nationalism. Carmichael has the necessary charisma to be a real threat in this way.
3. Prevent VIOLENCE on the part of black nationalist groups. This is of primary importance, and is, of course, a goal of our investigative activity; it should also be a goal of the Counterintelligence Program to pinpoint potential troublemakers and neutralize them before they exercise their potential for violence.
4. Prevent militant black nationalist groups and leaders from gaining RESPECTABILITY, by discrediting them to three separate segments of the community. The goal of discrediting black nationalists must be handled tactically in three ways. You must discredit those groups and individuals to, first, the responsible Negro community. Second, they must be discredited to the white community, both the responsible community and to “liberals” who have vestiges of sympathy for militant black nationalist [sic] simply because they are Negroes. Third, these groups must be discredited in the eyes of Negro radicals, the followers of the movement. This last area requires entirely different tactics from the first two. Publicity about violent tendencies and radical statements merely enhances black nationalists to the last group; it adds “respectability” in a different way.
5. A final goal should be to prevent the long-range GROWTH of militant black organizations, especially among youth. Specific tactics to prevent these groups from converting young people must be developed. […]
TARGETS
~~~~~~~
Primary targets of the Counterintelligence Program, Black Nationalist-Hate Groups, should be the most violent and radical groups and their leaders. We should emphasize those leaders and organizations that are nationwide in scope and are most capable of disrupting this country. These targets, members, and followers of the:
Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC)
Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC)
Revolutionary Action Movement (RAM)
Nation Of Islam (NOI)
Offices handling these cases and those of Stokely Carmichael of SNCC, H. Rap Brown of SNCC, Martin Luther King of SCLC, Maxwell Stanford of RAM, and Elijah Muhammed of NOI, should be alert for counterintelligence suggestions.” (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/COINTELPRO/COINTELPRO-FBI.docs.html)
These directives became manifest in the counter intelligence operations that included the pitting of the US organisation against the Black Panther Party for Self-Defence as well as the “bad-jacketing” (spreading false propaganda) of Kwame Ture (Stokely Carmichael). (3)
But this also must also be seen as part of global war on Black Consciousness evidenced in 1968 alone by (but by no means restricted to) the imprisonment of Obi Egbuna in the UK, the banning of Walter Rodney from Jamaica and the murder of Pierre Mulele in Mobutu’s Congo neo-colony. (4)
Aguably, the movement has never recovered from this onslaught. In the 1970s there even began to emerge the appearance of a self-generation of the COINTELPRO objectives from within, perhaps a testimony to its success. Whereas grassroots organisations were once regarded as advocates of and for the community they became increasingly alienated from it. In addition, the “responsible Negro community” increasingly takes its cues from white society in an enduring way. Indeed, as recent Afrika Speaks guest Dr. Jared Ball shared on the show, the primary motive behind Manning Marable’s 2011 Malcolm X: A Life Of Reinvention was to appease “white, affluent intellectual academics that were afraid of Malcolm X when he was alive”. (5) Another example was the screeching Sun newspaper headline, “Murder, drugs, extortion… Why the hell is Beyonce saluting the criminal Black Panthers?” in response to the superstar’s 2016 Super Bowl half-time show. (6)
Back in the 1970s Haki R Hadhubuti highlighted that this destructive tendency had taken hold within organisations. In Enemies: The Clash Of Races, he listed some the tactics used by “conscious and unconscious brothers and sisters to bring about the death of black institutions and organizations”:
“1. Don’t have an accurate understanding of the Institutions’s programmes and objectives. Do not attend briefing sessions and therefore frind yourself unable to push the programmes of the institution.
2. Don’t attend meetings. If you do attend come in your own time and leave when you get rerady even if it’s in the middle of the meeting.
3. Never offer constructive advice or criticism to the institution and if yu have anything negative or inimical to say, say it on the outside where it can be heard only by the enemies of the institution.
4. When a decision is made by the collective, go home and talk bad about the decision and do nothing unless it is in opposition to the collective decision.
5. Upon beceoming part of the institution, always push your personality and programme and refuse to adapt to the programme and personality of the institution.
6. Always find fault with the people in positions of responsibility, and do not discuss it with them, but go to enemies outside the institution with your criticism.
7. Be as inactive as possible while always talking about what the institution is not doing and what it is supposed to be doing
8. If asked about your inactivity, space on the question and talk about the inactivity of others to cover yourself.
9. When attending a meeting always sit at the back of the room where you can talk while the proceedings are going on.
10. Get all the benefits the institution can give, but give nothing back. This will surely limit the growth of the institution. Always try to take more than you put in.
11. Talk collective cooperation but never cooperate. Always eat but never bring food.
12. Never push the institution: always push yourself at the expense of the institution and its programmes.
13. Never bring new people. Talk about organizing but don’t organize.
14. If you can’t get your way, threaten to resign and push to see that others leave with you.
15. Never fulfill your obligations. If asked to help, never have time. When you take an assignment, half do it.
16. Never become an “officer” if elected. It is easier to bad mouth and talk about the irresponsibility of others than it is to assume responsibility and direct projects yourself.
17. Have an attitude that nothing is as important as your theories and ideas even if they have been proven unworkable and conflict with the institution and our people’s struggle.
18. When given an assignment nevr follow through to completion. And when confronted with your short-comings act insulted as if someone’s questioning your commitment to the struggle.
19. Seek leadership positions, but do not work and study comensurate with the position you seek.
20. Always maintain a negative attitude toward the institution as well as the members of the institution. In fact, make negatism your programme.
21. Never other anything constructive in the development of an ideological or philosophical base to operate from. But he highly critical of what everybody else offers.” (7)
Madhubuti adds:
“These are just the most obvious tactics used to disrupt or destroy institutions. Others that are less obvious would be the man-woman conflict (due mainly to the insecurities of both parties, brought on us by our being socialized by the West because of which we have understanding of our complimentary roles and responsibilities); infiltration from the outside (everything from the police to gay liberation) – this can be avoided if you have a socialization process that pushes the correct values and demands discipline, total accountability and is productive in getting useful work completed. Remember, if we don’t push the correct values, we will get pushed by others with their values, whether they are correct or not.” (8)
COINTELPRO was supposedly officially closed by the FBI in 1971 and some aspects of the misdeeds were revealed in the Church Committee report of 1976. However, this was mainly a cosmetic adjustment as the surveillance activities continued under a different banner. (9)
Presumably in response to the false dawn that was Black Lives Matter the surveillance state was found increased impetus in Mosiah (Aug) 2017 with the FBI proclaiming the existence of ‘Black Identity Extremists’ (BIE) and the likelihood that they will “target law enforcement officers.” The report used a handful of disparate cases that it tried to stitch together in an effort to create an extremist black movement. They abandoned the term two years later, in favour of “racially motivated violent extremism” category. (10)
However, as an indication of the ongoing counter intelligence programme, we can point to the simple example revealed at the PASCF’s 20th anniversary transition tribute to Kwame Ture in Brixton in November 2018. The event included a live link-up with Baba Ture’s son Bokar, during which Bro. Bokar, while acknowledging that he is nowhere near as involved in the Movement as his father was, revealed that he is yet subject to constant surveillance by the state. Of course, there is also the tragic case of Omowale Malcolm X’s grandson, Malcolm Shabazz who was murdered in Mexico in May 2013. This occurred after he had appealed to the community, following a campaign of intimidation by the state, at the time headed by President Barack Obama, just two months before his death:
“As I stand for the people, God-Willing, I would pray that the same people wouldn’t hesitate to stand for me. If these unjust & heinous actions are tolerated & allowed to be done to me without recourse, then no one is safe.” (11)
The legacy of all of this, as it manifests in the UK, is that we have existing organisations “as pioneers who plough on, sometimes to the disdain of the community they seek to uplift.” (12) Moreover, efforts to build coalitions bringing together different political and ideological perspectives, beyond the seemingly perennial campaign politics that characterises much community organising, never seem to sustain themselves. (13)
There has never really been clear evidence of an extensive operation on the level of COINTELPRO in the UK but we know that the police are the leading edge of individual surveillance operations, particularly with regard to death in custody cases. (14) Moreover, there is a curious phenomenon in the UK where failure to create lasting institutions is invariably attributed to “ego” and “personality clashes” rather than infiltration, as if one person’s forthright sense of self is enough to scupper generations of conscious toil. Beyond guarded rumours, there never has been a serious examination of the propensity and impact of counter intelligence of the liberation movement in the UK. Yet even if there were, it would compel to consider what capacity there is to address it.
(1) Baba Zak Kondo (1993) Conspiracys: Unravelling the Assassinationof Malcolm X. Nubia Press. p. 195.
(2) Jonathan David Farley (04/04/08) Preventing the rise of a ‘messiah’. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/apr/04/preventingtheriseofamessi. http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/message-to-grassroots/#doc-tabs-full
(3) Kondo. p. 29, p. 229.
(4) Obi Egbuna (1971) Destroy This Temple: The Voice Of Black Power in Britain. William Morrow. p. 10; Eric Huntley (2018) Come Lehwe Reason: A Journey of 50 Years with Walter Rodney. Bogle-L’Ouverture Publications Ltd. p. 57-65; Headsman (09/10/13) 1968: Pierre Mulele, hoodwinked. https://www.executedtoday.com/2013/10/09/1968-pierre-mulele-congo-mobut/
(5) Alkebu-Lan Revivalist Movement (03/02/20) Buying Black – Does it make a difference? https://www.mixcloud.com/AfrikaSpeaks/buying-black-does-it-make-a-difference-03022020/
(6) Caroline Iggulden (10/02/16) Murder, drugs, extortion… Why the hell is Beyonce saluting the criminal Black Panthers? https://www.thesun.co.uk/archives/news/103141/murder-drugs-extortion-why-the-hell-is-beyonce-saluting-the-criminal-black-panthers/
(7) Haki R Hadhubuti (1978) Enemies: The Clash Of Races. Third World Press. p. 133-4
(8) Ibid
(9) Dia Kayyali (13/02/14) The History of Surveillance and the Black Community. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/02/history-surveillance-and-black-community
(10) FBI Conterterrorism Divison (03/08/17) (U//FOUO) Black Identity Extremists ’Likely Motivated to Target Law Enforcement Officers. https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000015f-11c2-d01e-a35f-f7c641380000; Byron Tau (23/07/19) Bureau has reorganized domestic terrorism categorization in favor of ‘racially motivated violent extremism’ category. https://www.wsj.com/articles/fbi-abandons-use-of-terms-black-identity-extremism-11563921355
(11) Bro. Ldr. Mbandaka (2014) Anniversary of Malcolm Shabazz Assassination &the US Conspiracy To Stop the Rise of the “Black Messiah”, The Whirlwind, Edition 11. p. 4-5
(12) Claudius Adisa Steven (2019) The Evolution Ideas And Practices Among African-Centred Organisations In The UK 1975-2015 in Hakim Adi (Ed) Black British History: New Perspectives. Zed Books. p. 159.
(13) iNAPP Council of Elders (15/05/15) Statement From iNAPP Council of Elders. https://web.archive.org/web/20150515165628/http://www.inapp.org.uk/
(14) INQUEST (01/03/18) Humberside police misconduct hearing finds that surveillance of Janet Alder was unlawful but concludes with ‘no case to answer’ for officers involved. https://www.inquest.org.uk/alder-surveillance-conclusion
We ask the question:
COINTELPRO – Is it still working?
1) Will you be attending the Omowale Malcolm X Observance on the 23rd?
2) Has the Movement recovered from the 1960s onslaught?
3) Is the COINTELPRO programme now self-generating?
4) What are the “correct values” needed to avoid ongoing community implosion?
5) Are organisations now operating “to the disdain of the community they seek to uplift”?
6) Do we have any idea of the scope and impact counter intelligence in the UK or how to deal with?