Talk:Black Panther Party/Archive 1

message: This article and the Fred Hampton article are some of the most biased that I have ever run across on wikipedia.  Please keep a neutral point of view and don't claim things that are opinions and not factually proven!
Anomie666 04:48, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

message: Someone (with an axe to grind?) keeps removing all references to Richard Aoki from
this article - who is it, and why are they doing it? Many independent internet
sources confirm that Aoki was a co-founder of the BPP. I only learned of Aoki's
existence from the mention in a previous incarnation of this article - coming 
back a few weeks later, I was rather surprised to find all mention of him 
deleted!
84.65.77.43 17:46, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Richard Aoki

message: The article says
"The party rejected the integrationist stance of King, and made it clear from the beginning that it sought no compromise with the "white power structure"
and shortly after goes on to say
"Although the party was characterized by varying degrees of black nationalism, Newton and Seale rejected cultural nationalists as "black racists".  Contrary to popular perception, the BPP was not a separatist organization, and worked closely with many white activists"
Which is it? --Graphic 22:37, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Conflict

message: Article needs reorganization, so i'm just laying out this structure mostly for myself.
Introduction
* Ten point plan
* Breakfast program
* Merger with SNCC
* COINTELPRO & East/West split
* Decay, BLA etc.
Graft 15:40, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed structure by Graft

message: The neutrality of the article should be questioned, since it lays the entire responsibility for the disintegration of the BPP solely on the FBI, whereas there are other reasons that led to their demise, e.g., the degeneration of the Panthers to a security service for drug dealers in black neighborhoods. (note: posted by anonymous 24.107.207.28)
:I'm afraid I know very little about the black panthers, however surely this should not be a "Neutrality" question but instead is a minor factual issue with a single sentence. Could this not be resolved by changing the sentence to:
::The Party eventually fell apart due to a number of reasons including rising legal costs and disputes resulting from COINTELPRO, ... 
: and then adding other reasons. Having said I know nothing about it, it does seem to me that "degeneration ... [in] to a security service for drug dealers" would be more an effect of the gradual disintegration rather than a cause. MrWeeble 00:11, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality questioned

message: IIRC Horowitz was never a party member; he was on the staff of one of its projects. According to Seale, membership in the party proper was not open to whites. A brief mention of Horowitz somewhere in the article, that does not overlap too much with his own article, is probably appropriate. Gazpacho 00:13, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Horowitz's association

message: I saw one of the original party members "live from jail" on PBS - who would this have been?  For some reason I thought it was Peter Reid but Peter Reid is an Ironman athlete.  (I swear, to this day, that it was Peter Reid: Live From Jail, but someone suggested it might have been Bobby Seal.)  The special aired in 2001, October, on local WQEX 16 Pittsburgh: if anyone knows who that was, it was a great special, a very motivational speaker even through the television.
:I believe it was Huey P. Newton.  But I trhink the special in question was an actor's one-man show based on the life and writings of Huey, not Huey himself.  If its the same one I saw, he's on stage in a theater-in the round, and the scenery is that of a jailhouse.  his audience looks down on him from above.  Pretty good special.--Rockero 20:46, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Live From Jail" on PBS 

message: I think we should assume that James Cromwell, the Black Panther, isn't the same person as James Cromwell, the actor. MK2 05:25, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, this bio says that the actor was a member of the Committee to Defend the Black Panthers. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 04:57, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: James Cromwell?

message: Hi, could someone verify Eric gersham and if worth keeping move it to Eric Gershman? Rd232 talk 12:53, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eric gersham 

message: The following paragraph is inconsistent with the article:
: Contrary to popular perception, the BPP was not a separatist organization and worked closely with many white activists (for example, California's Peace and Freedom Party and the Irish Republican Army). Indicative of this was the BPP's use of the slogan "All Power to the People!" which represents a more internationalist (and Marxist) perspective than the famous slogan, "Black Power!" .
It cannot be both true that the BPP was an organizatrion that opposed integrationism and that was not separatist. Moreover, the link doesn't provide any evidence to substantiate the claim that they were not separatist. For this reason, I'm temporarily removing it. Sir Paul 23:34, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that you have misread the article - it says that "The party rejected the integrationist stance of King", not that the party opposed all integration with white people. This distinction is supported by their cooperation w/ the (largely white) Peace and Freedom Party and the IRA. Additionally, the topic is discussed in Seale's autobiography Sieze the Time. If this is confusing, I'd recommend rewording the bit about King. The BPP was clearly not a seperatist group and I don't believe that *any* literature written by Newton or Seale would support such a claim. Nihila 21:05, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah. I located the proper source for this bit about the slogans . Since the source is now fixed, I've taken the liberty of restoring the paragraph. Nihila 21:16, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Integrationism 

message: According to the Alan Rosenberg article, he was a Black Panther. If this is true, it might be worthwhile adding him. Even tho he was never very active I guess he's quite famous in his own right due to being an actor and now the president of the screen actors guild. The fact that he's white (AFAIK) is also substanial since it's further evidence that the black panthers weren't anti-white...Nil Einne 10:40, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Alan Rosenberg

message: what about a section for chapter histories? i just completed a basic history of the boston chapter and think it would be a good addition, especially for chapters in places like New Bedford, Massachusetts where not much is written about it. It could be a very short history, condensed to a paragraph or two, perhaps.
--
I picked up a book on the history of the New Orleans chapter.  It's a collection of interviews from people who were involved in the events of that chapter.  I also have a video of an interview with one of the leaders of the New Orleans Panther's chapter.  So ... how about someone starts a section on chapters while I gather my thoughts?
Tall Girl 08:05, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  BPP Chapter Histories 

message: I have a paper that is due this weekend, and i was just curious as to everyones opinion on how they see things. There is always a resolition to every problem, but is violence the answer? then again, nobody likes to be bullied. 
I would appreciate your comments. Thank You
:As you can see from the POV disputes above, this page is not an example of a great wikipedia article, but it should introduce you to some of the basics of the BPP.  You should be able to see a little bit about its positives and negatives.  Take a look at the ten point plan, and the social and community activities that they took part in.  Then think about, for instance, the Black Liberation Army or the Rice/Poindexter Case.
:A major hole in this article is that there is no discussion of the inspirations of the BPP.  The BPP was inspired by the actions of, for instance, the Black Consciousness Movement and the ANC in South Africa.  These groups, too, have mixed legacies.  It is hard to say if their legacy was good or bad.  Certainly there are good people who were killed, and this must not be overlooked, so it is important to bear in mind those bad things.  For me, the BPP introduced activists of my parents generation to emancipatory anti-colonial writers such as Frantz Fanon (see Négritude); these activists then turned around and formed such groups as the American Indian Movement.  So I would say that the BPP was very inspirational to many oppressed peoples who were not satisfied with any form of civil rights which felt vaguely assimilationist.  On the other hand, many of the tactics of the BPP (and related groups such as the Black Liberation Army) alienated many good people who would like to have supported civil rights. Smmurphy(Talk) 02:34, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It was Seale according to Voices of Revolution: The Dissident Press in America by Rodger Streitmatter (2001) pg 226. Smmurphy(Talk) 16:39, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This was probably the stock explanation of the name and its significance to the members. As such, it could have been said by any number of its leaders. --Daniel 00:18, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pros & Cons of BPP on Civil Rights Movement 

message: I just spent a few minutes doing some initial revision of this article. I was mainly trying to remove some of the blatantly POV language and unsourced opinion. Obviously this is just the tip of the iceberg in making this article a high-quality entry. Lots of cleanup remains and there are numerous angles and aspects that are not yet included.
My apologies if I have removed anything that was important to anyone. Feel free to replace sections that I've cut but please source stuff that you add. I could not find a source on the number of police killed by Panthers. Can anyone help with this? -Nihila 17:36, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewriting this Page 

message: So, it has been several days since the last significant edit to this article and the general quality of the page's content has increased dramatically. Obviously there is still a lot more that can be done; however, I think that things are starting to look pretty good. Does anyone object to removing the NPOV banner from the article? If so, what sections are still in dire need of attention? - Nihila 21:53, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been busy, but there are still a couple of points that should be cited, the part about carying weapons in Oakland and how that affected their relationship with the police (in the section called "Self-defense"), as well as the part about predominately white police departments leading to race riots (in the section called "Police brutality").  In fact, that section is still very problematic.  Also, having a section titled "Police brutality" is probably a little NPOV, and that stuff could go under the section now entitled "COINTELPRO and the conflict with law enforcement".  I know that that would make one of our longest sections even longer, but (IMHO) that means that we should expand our short sections, not shy away from making the sections make sence. Smmurphy(Talk) 23:26, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the Self-Defense section is non-neutral. The title alone is a problem. Also, the section fails to mention that Panthers instigated some of the clashes with police. These cannot be described as "self-protection" and still be neutral. Further, the section fails to mention that the Panther violence and criminality often made them a legitimate target for law enforcement. Second, the Community Work section is way off NPOV. It ignores the fact that drug-dealing and embezzlement were intertwined with the social service initiatives.Pokey5945 23:55, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, kool. I just wanted to make sure that the page wasnt in stasis. I agree w/ comments about the "Police Brutality" section. Pokey5945, are there any specific events that you would like to include where Panthers instigated clashes? I'd be happy to work on fleshing this out. - Nihila 00:43, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was thinking of the book Shadow of the Panthers, and one of the famous early shootouts with the police in the Bay Area in which a Panther was killed. This gave them a lot of publicity as victims of police violence, but one of the participants has more recently admitted that they instigated the incident. I'd have to reread the book to get more detail.Pokey5945 06:22, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing NPOV banner? 

message: This article has some very deep problems in which barely proven statements are backed up by sources which are dubious at best.  Does anyone actually believe that Ward Churchill is a credible source?  Please.  There is also no mention of the very important fact of how many police officers and other innocent people were killed by the Black Panthers.
:Just because someone is controversial doesn't mean they do their homework. For Agents of Repression, Churchill used FBI files released under the Church Committee hearings and Freedom of Information Act requests. If you're looking for yet more proof of the nogoodnik nature of the Hoover/COINTELPRO-era FBI, check out Brian Glick's War at Home, cited in the COINTELPRO article.  --Daniel 03:17, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't seen a reliable source on the number of police officers killed by BPP members. Can you provide one? I can't imagine that anyone would object to its inclusion. - N1h1l 03:18, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Generally Biased 

message: The article states that the Black Panthers were founded in October 1966, but I have a newspaper article in front of me referring to the group in September 1966. When was it actually formed? Uucp 03:17, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formation Date? 

message: Response to posting below:  Firstly, the death of a police officer, doing his/her proper job is a truly sad thing.  (Proper job meaning defending the public from crime).  However, it is interesting that many officers were used to attack the Panthers.  Thus, if some officers died while attacking innocent Black Panthers, this is much more different than if a Black Panther killed an officer in cold blood.  Secondly, what proof is there that none of the officers died from friendly fire.  It is disgusting that people would attack the Panthers without giving further details.  It is as though a soldier or police officer is beyond reproof!!!!!
=======
I'm removing this from the page for now, for POV, sourcing and formatting work.   Also Faulkner doesn't really belong on this list (the circumstances of the other officers notwithstanding) because his alledged killer was not a member of the BPP at the time of the killing.  As anyone familiar with the case will know, all aspects of the killing of Faulkner are disputed, and so must be handled very carefully.  The whole list will require sourcing an NPOV discussion anyway. DJ Silverfish 14:55, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Police Officers Murdered 

message: I'm removing this from the page for now, for POV, sourcing and formatting work.   Also Faulkner doesn't really belong on this list (the circumstances of the other officers notwithstanding) because his alledged killer was not a member of the BPP at the time of the killing.  As anyone familiar with the case will know, all aspects of the killing of Faulkner are disputed, and so must be handled very carefully.  The whole list will require sourcing an NPOV discussion anyway. DJ Silverfish 14:55, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: =

message: I can certainly understand how it is that this article has been met with so much criticism. It is true that encyclopedia accounts should remain unbiased. However, this is not to say that articles should not contain and put forward the major arguments concerning a particular group or event. The historiography of a subject deserves as much space in an article as the history itself, and this is especially true for the Black Panthers. 
The Panthers have oft been depicted as a group of murderous thugs who utilised a mish-mash of Marxist-Leninism to cover up their covert criminality. Due to the content of such popular films as Forrest Gump this is the image that remains particularly reasonant within popular society. There is also the point of view that the Panthers did many very positive things through their aid programmes. Some believe that they were persecuted by the police, and some recent judgments certainly suggest this. For those who question such a comment I would advise you to look into the case of Geronomio Pratt. 
I believe that this article thus addresses a very important point. The legacy of this group has long been dirtied by right-wing sociologists and commentators accusing them of being anti-semitics etc. bent on organising a totalitarian party - in response to those who said that this article stinks of, and I quote, 'bullshit', it is the comments of Horowitz etc. that are unfounded bullshit. Of course it is true that emotive language has no place in an encyclopedia, and I do believe some of the phrasing needs to be reworded.
I would also suggest that a significant amount of the article needs reworking. This is particularly prevalent towards the end, when the demise of the group is quickly skirted over and attributed almost soley to the actions of the FBI. As is often the case with the Panthers, there seems to be very little mention of Elaine Brown's period of leadership. Also there are many factors contributing to the Party's demise: Robert Michels elite theory is certainly applicable to the leadership style of Newton; the recruitment of the lumpenproletariat is certainly key; the lack of organization; dialectical discovery of the Panthers by the media via law enforcement groups; the overly-rapid expansion of the Party and the list goes on. I recommend that you take a look at Charles E. Jones, 'The Black Panther Party Reconsidered'
--Djsweaty 14:55, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Room for improvement 

message: Is there any objection to the removal of the neutrality dispute banner? This article still needs work (I'd endorse the inclusion of a brief "Criticism" section although I'm not qualified to write one), but I see no ongoing disputes on the talk page. - N1h1l 02:55, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Great, find some reliable sources and lets get a criticism section started! - N1h1l 05:32, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality Dispute? 

message: I feel that this article is not only biased, but factually wrong: the activities of COINTELPRO are made to sound like conspiracy theories, when in fact there is government documentation of these activities which has since been declassified and is available to the public.
A good source for independent research on COINTELPRO is the website http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/cointelpro/cointel.htm
The neutrality dispute banner should stay up until this, at least, is corrected.
:I believe that you are incorrectly reading the article. For instance, you stated that "This article accuses the FBI of assassination"; however, the article merely notes that "have been a variety of allegations"..."including allegations of assassination." (emphasis mine) I believe that this is an NPOV statement of fact. - N1h1l 12:47, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  COINTELPRO 

message: The BPP was not actually founded by Seale and Newton-it was only formed by them.  It was established by members of SNCC forming the Lowndes County Freedom Org.  It was organized as an independent political party against the democratic party with a balck panther as the symbol.  Certain groups of the south intended to create violence around election time to ensure the independent party would not win.  SNCC realized the threat and used their contacts across the country to come and help protect the area.  The idea of BPP spreading outside of SNCC was the result of creating a force to protect the Lowndes area during elections.  From an interview with Stokely Carmichael, "The one who came from California to take it back was a brother by the name of Mark Comfort. He was the one who took the idea originally back to California, and it was from his that other groups sprang up and finally later on, Huey Newton and Bobby Seale and them came on the scene."
Link to the interview:
http://www.teachersdomain.org/9-12/soc/ush/civil/carmich/iml04_doc_fullcarmich.pdf
Where does it mention the violent actions of the Black Panther Party?  Going simply by the article you'd think this was a peaceful political organization, but it was a very violent organization even advocating black people killling white policemen if they ventured into prodominantly black neighborhood.  And their slogan, "Bread, Land, Peace, Justice" sounds suspiciously similar to Lenin's "Bread, Land and Peace."  This article is particularly biased because there is no mention of the negative things it did, and the claims of the party are taken as Gospel truth, such as the part about a military using black people to murder other colored people.  This article might as well have been written by the press secretary of the Black Panther Party, and I think it likely that a former member or "fellow traveller" who sympathized with the Black Panther Party wrote this article.
        JAD
I am offended by the mention of Huey P Newtin as a "black racist" he is just a man who tried to come up with a way to protect his people from the WHITE POLICE who beat blacks for no reason that is not a black rascist!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:You may find people take you more seriously if you limit yourself to one exclaimation point.  Also, for emphasis, try using all caps, bold, or italics, but not combinations.  Also, periods are your friends.  They separate sentences! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 131.137.245.199 (talk) 21:49, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Beginnings 

message: At the very end of the "Action" section, we have the statement that "[Bobby] Seale was acquitted by a hung jury".  This is impossible as stated.  In the U.S. criminal legal system, a hung jury results in a mistrial and is neither an acquittal or a conviction, and the case can be retried.  I presume what happened is that after the mistrial, the prosecution decided not to drop the case instead of retrying Seale.  This would be similar to an acquittal for the defendant, in that, as I understand it, jeopardy would have attached and once the charges were dropped, he could never be tried again for the alleged crime.  But it is not the same thing.  I did not find details on the result of this case but if someone does, the text should be corrected.
::You're correct that the wording is incorrect and contradicts itself. You are incorrect that the prosecutor's decision not to retry amounts to an acquittal. The prosecutor retains the option to reopen the case until the statute of limitations expires.Verklempt 04:25, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Acquitted by a hung jury" 

message: The Black Panthers -- a racist, terrorist organization -- were a "civil rights and self-defense" group?  LOL.  NPOV.  SveinForkbeard 12:17, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Terrorist? Who did they kill? I'm serious here because I've never heard anything about that. It sounds like you have a pretty pov interpretation yourself. Ungovernable ForceGot something to say? 19:23, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most absured bias 

message: I removed the tag "pacifist" from the description of the Peace and Freedom Party because that party has never been a pacifist organization.  For example, the party has always had in its platform a plank defending the right to keep and bear arms.  Please note the difference between "pacifist" and "anti-war".  --Davecampbell 19:38, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peace and Freedom Party is not pacifist 

message: Some one has edited the ten point program and put racist text in capital letters in it,
IM A CRACKA. SHUTUP U SLAVES.
   1. We want DICK. We want power to determine the destiny of our black and oppressed communities.
   2. We want full employment for our people FOR THE COTTON INDUSTRIES.
   3. We want an end to the robbery PERSEUTIONS, EVEN THO WE DO ROB PEOPLE
   4. We want decent CARDBOARDING FOR PANELING, fit for the shelter of human beings.
   5. We want decent education for our people that exposes the true nature of this decadent American society. We want education that teaches us our true history and our role in the present-day society.
   6. We want completely free health care for all black and oppressed people.
   7. We want an immediate end to police brutality and murder of black people, other people of color, all oppressed people inside the United States.
   8. We want an immediate end to all wars of aggression.
   9. We want freedom for all black and oppressed people now held in U. S. Federal, state, county, city and military prisons and jails. We want trials by a jury of peers for all persons charged with so-called crimes under the laws of this country.
  10. We want land, bread, housing, education, clothing, justice, peace and people's community control of modern technology.
D'EM CHICKEN FINGERS R FINGA LICKIN GOOD!! SO IS THEY WATAMELONS....mmmmMMMMMMMmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
''
this should not be allowed, and i have decided to  remove it, however did this should be ashamed of themselves. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.149.253.106 (talk) 19:37, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  the ten point prgram 

message: Is this necessary? Because to me it just looks ridiculous. Circa should be reserved for ancient history subjects. I was going to change it myself, but wanted to get some consensus first. Update-changed c.5,000 to c.1969 SparklingPessimist Scream at me! 03:00, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Circa 5,000, really?