Hungry Blues

[MAJOR CORRECTIONS. SEE NEXT POST]

Do you remember this man?

He is Triad GSI technician Michael Barbian, who has been implicated in tampering with a Hocking County punch card ballot machine and in conspiring to have Hocking County deputy director of elections Sherole Eaton prepare a "cheat sheet" so that during the recount the sample hand count would match the machine count.

Democratic Underground user kitkat65 has found some pictures on the Ohio Democratic Party website of the recount in Geauga Guernsey County, where Michael Barbian appears to have been present.

The man who looks very much like Mr.Barbian seems quite involved in the recount, talking to election officials and hovering around what appears to be a ballot counting machine. To say the very least, this bears some further investigation.

Update:
Geauga County is of some significance in the National Voting Rights Institute motion asking the federal court to preserve all ballots and election machinery. The memorandum (pdf) that includes the motion to preserve all ballots and election machinery makes special mention of Geauga County because it is one of several counties that will hold special elections on February 8, 2005. (The other counties are: Cuyahoga, Butler, Trumbull, and Wood.) In Geauga County, the special election is for a ballot question on a tax issue. I haven't yet checked to see what is on the ballot in the other four counties.

In all of these counties, the 2004 presidential election data is likely to be destroyed in order to use the machines for a new election. Given the allegations of criminal activity by Mr. Barbian in Hocking County, it would seem all the more pressing to preserve the electronic data from the voting machines in counties where he was present prior to or during a recount.

Go here for more information on the National Voting Rights Institute's legal actions in Ohio as counsel to Presidential Candidates David Cobb (Green Party) and Michael Badnarick (Libertarian) to have a full recount of all votes cast in Ohio. For detailed information on the recount effort in Ohio, see the county reports on the Cobb/LaMarche 2004 website.

Update #2:
kitkat65 points out that Geauga County is not a county administered by Triad. According to the data at VerifiedVoting.org, Geauga County uses optical scan machines, administered by ES&S:

Geauga County Detail:
Voting Technology: Optical Scan: Central Count
Vendor: Election Systems and Software, Inc. (ES&S)
Data Source: CASE-ohio.org; electionline.org
Last Verified: 4-Sep

Either Michael Barbian is not in the Ohio Democratic Party photos—or something extremely suspicious was going on during that recount.

Update #3:
MAJOR CORRECTIONS. SEE NEXT POST.

(link)

January 20, 2005

Warren Mitofsky
Mitofsky International
1776 Broadway - Suite 1708
New York, NY 10019

Larry Rosin
President
Edison Media Research
6 W. Cliff St.
Somerville, NJ 08876

Dear Mr. Mitofsky and Mr. Rosin:

I have reviewed the internal report you issued yesterday concerning your exit polling in the 2004 election, and, unfortunately, it has not caused my concerns and questions regarding the significant discrepancies between your polling data and the final electoral results to diminish.

In particular, I would note that there are a number of concerns with the explanations you posited in your internal report that do not credibly account for the unprecedented five point differential between your exit polls and the reported results. As I am sure you know, Professor Steven Freeman of the University of Pennsylvania has determined that such a differential was of a less than 1 in a 1000 likelihood - virtually impossible as a statistical matter.

To be frank, blaming such factors as distant restrictions on polling places, weather conditions, the age of exit poll workers, and the fact that multiple precincts were contained at the same polling place, as your report does, does not come close to explaining why the exit polls overstated support for the Kerry/Edwards ticket in 26 states and support for the Bush/Cheney ticket in only 4 states. Many of the factors you point to appear to merely be random characteristics of the election and your exit polling, rather than quantifiable and justifiable explanations. Nor can I believe that the massive discrepancies can credibly be written off to eagerness of Kerry voters to participate in the exit polls.

As a result, I would like to reiterate my request to receive the actual raw exit poll data that you obtained. I would also like to obtain copies of all internal deliberations, memos and other materials of your employees and consultants concerning or seeking to explain the discrepancies. To the extent you have concerns regarding releasing propriety information, I am willing to work with you to either receive this information on a confidential basis, or alternatively to bring in a neutral, outside expert to review these materials.

The stakes for our democracy are simply too high for us to allow this matter to pass without a serious and substantive review of the exit poll data. While the election is over, there is significant bipartisan sentiment in Congress and around the nation for voting reform. A complete and full release of the exit poll information will therefore not only help to resolve lingering doubts regarding irregularities in the 2004 election, it will also go a long way towards helping Congress understand how to best craft these reforms. I am hopeful that the media companies that contract for your services will also understand and support the importance of providing full, complete, and transparent information in this matter.

I would appreciate your responding to my office through my Judiciary Committee staff, Perry Apelbaum and Ted Kalo, 2142 Rayburn House Office Building (tel. 202-225-6504, fax 202-225-4423), by January 27th. Thank you.

Sincerely,

John Conyers, Jr.
Ranking Member
House Judiciary Committee

cc: Hon. F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.
Chairman, House Judiciary Committee

Or, why John Conyers is to be admired and John Kerry is a hypocrite opportunist

‘The Battle goes on’: An exclusive interview with Congressman Conyers and Raw Story

From the interview:

Larisa: You mentioned in your letter to your supporters that you have gotten some negative feedback and opposition. Why do you think there has been such resistance to your investigation among some elements of the Democratic Party?

Conyers: I think some of our Democrats feel it is a hopeless task and it will not accomplish much. They don’t realize that all of the people who were deeply hurt or angered or disgusted by the way they were treated are looking for someone to help them remedy the situation. Otherwise we run the risk of having fewer people participate in the next presidential election.

Larisa: Because they are discouraged.

Conyers: Right, they are discouraged and there are a number of people, sad to say, they are not even going to come forward to me or my committee. They have just given up, they feel the process is hopeless, how many of them are there I don’t know.

Conyers is very clear that one essential purpose for his public stand on the 2004 election is to send the appropriate message to voters who were disenfranchised. One of the ways that institutional racism works is by sending the message to African American voters that they don't count: not their votes, not their rights, not their hurt and anger. Racism in all its forms, whether structural or the grossest personal, violent attacks is meant to subdue its targets, to discourage them, as Larisa and Conyers put it. Our lawmakers and our law enforcement agencies ought to see it as their duty to validate the feelings of the voters who were disenfranchised and make a very clear show of pursuing justice for them. Sadly, Conyers is rare in his willingness to do this.

Now let's take John Kerry. John Kerry has yet to speak up for disenfranchised voters. He mentions them, but his expressed commitment to reform is empty without an expressed commitment to justice. Why hasn't he made public overtures to John Conyers and the House Judiciary Democrats? Why hasn't he made public overtures to Representative Jesse Jackson, Jr., who has been one of the most visible advocates of election reform that explicitly addresses civil rights issues? Why hasn't he called on Republican House Judiciary Chair F. James Sensenbrenner to support official hearings, which would give House investigators the power to issue subpoenas? And, as I've already asked, why hasn't Kerry given real support to the lawsuits on behalf of Ohio voters? Even an endorsement without legal participation would make a great difference.

You may have read here, or elsewhere, that Ohio's Republican Attorney General, James Petro, has moved for sanctions against Robert Fitrakis, Susan Truitt, Cliff Arnebeck and Peter Peckarsky, the four attorneys who sued George W. Bush et. al in an attempt to further investigate the election. Kerry has been silent about this, of course. John Conyers, on the other hand, has issued a formal letter to Attorney General Petro, expressing concern

that by seeking official censure and fines, you are engaged in a selective and partisan misuse of your legal authority. As eager as many disgruntled voters are to have a court of law finally assess the merits of the challenge actions, I have serious doubts about the validity of the sanctions case your office is pursuing.

As an initial matter, one would be hard pressed to see how the legal challenges brought under the Ohio election challenge statute were "frivolous." First off, it is widely known that the Ohio presidential election was literally riddled with irregularities and improprieties, many of which are set forth in the 102 page report issued by the House Judiciary Committee Democratic Staff. (http://www.house.gov) As a matter of fact, the problems were so great that Congress was forced to debate the first challenge to an entire state's slate of electors since the federal Electoral Count law was enacted in 1877. In short, there is more than an abundant record raising serious, substantive questions about the Ohio presidential election.

John Kerry has a lot to learn from John Conyers. Kerry's "commitment" to election reform with no demonstrated commitment to justice for the voters who turned out on his behalf, and waited on lines in the rain for hours, is a slimy sales pitch to a base that would do well to shop elsewhere.

Hawaiians, blacks unite at King parade Vicki Viotti

The queen's portrait hung next to that of a King. In this case, the pair were separated by time and space — though they both labored peacefully for the rights of their people, said Mel Kalahiki.

"We have the same dream," said Kalahiki, who helps organize the yearly "Onipa'a" anniversaries of the Hawaiian kingdom overthrow. "We dream someday that the U.S., with all their might, is going to say, 'Justice is not done.' "

Kalahiki was waiting at Ala Moana Park to join yesterday's Martin Luther King Jr. Day Parade, which this year occurred on the same day as the Hawaiian observance. That's why the occasion — a parade through Waikiki and a "unity rally" at Kapi'olani Park — was a shared presentation and blended the themes of civil rights and Hawaiian sovereignty activism.

"Well, it just so happened!" she said with a wry laugh. "What can I say?"

Those lei-draped portraits were presented to Patricia Anthony and Marsha Joyner, representing the parade sponsoring Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Coalition-Hawai'i, who carried them the rest of the way to the park.

Will Pit Interview With Morgan Freeman On The MLK Memorial

A memorial,
long overdue, will be built on the National Mall in Washington. It will
be appropriately situated on four acres of the nation's most hallowed
ground in a direct line between the Lincoln and Jefferson Memorials.
The centerpiece is large a "Stone of Hope," on which the silhouette of
Dr. King will be carved, symbolizing his walking out of the mountain of
despair. Dr. King's sermons and speeches will be etched into a
significant portion of the Memorial. The Memorial will fittingly be
situated in the midst of the cherry blossoms, which will be bloom each
year on the anniversary of Dr King's assassination.

This memorial
project came about from the ambitious efforts of the Alpha Phi Alpha
fraternities. For over 20 years, the fraternity worked to make this
dream a reality. As a result, in 1996, Congress signed an Act
authorizing a Memorial in Washington and President Clinton signed the
legislation authorizing the building to take place on the Tidal Basin.

(also see Build The Dream.)

On Point: The Power of Black Radio (radio show)

There was music that said "stand up," charismatic DJs, and direct calls
for real equality. Black radio during the civil rights movement played
a key role in the struggle. In some cases that meant gospel songs, in
other cases, R&B with chart toppers like "People get ready" or
"keep on pushing."

From a very practical standpoint radio was
also the best way to get the word out to many black communities in
Birmingham, Chicago, Atlanta. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s
organization, the Southern Christian Leadership Council, shared a
building with black radio station WERD. One DJ there, Jockey Jack
Gibson, used to drop his microphone out the window and down a few
stories so that King could read his announcements early on in the civil
rights struggle.

Hear a conversation with historian Brian Ward
and Shelley Stewart, one of the era's most prominent DJs, the role of
black radio in the civil rights movement of the '50s and '60s.

Prometheus 6 - Background reading for "Race - The Power of an Illusion"

A Struggle for Rights: 'Eyes on the Prize' Mired in Money Battle DeNeen L. Brown and Hamil R. Harris

Many of these images of the black freedom struggle were
captured in the award-winning 1987 documentary series "Eyes on the
Prize," which portrayed the civil rights movement and the heroic
efforts of Martin Luther King Jr.

What scares Lewis now is that a new generation of
people who know little or nothing about what it took for black people
to get this far in this country -- with rights to vote, rights to
attend the same schools as whites, rights to live in the same
neighborhoods, ride the same trains, buses, work in the same places --
may not be able to see the film.

Yes, there are books and photographs about the
struggle. But those alone can't tell the story the way "Eyes on the
Prize" did, Lewis says. The series is no longer available in stores and
can't be shown on television or released on DVD until the filmmakers
are able to renew the expired rights to footage, photos and music that
were used. Old sets of VHS tapes owned by community centers and schools
are wearing out. Teachers and librarians seeking new copies can't
purchase them, except for rare ones being sold on eBay for as much as
$1,500.

The film is hampered by the same problem many
documentary filmmakers are encountering as they wrestle with buying and
renewing licenses to use copyrighted archival footage, photos and
music. Independent filmmakers must pay for each piece of copyrighted
material, and those costs have escalated in the past 10 years.

Some of the footage in "Eyes" was cleared for only
five years, and the executive producer died before renewing the rights.
"Eyes on the Prize," which was produced by Blackside Inc., a film and
television company founded by Henry Hampton, won 23 awards, including
two Emmys, for outstanding documentary and for outstanding achievement
in writing. The first six parts aired in 1987. It was last broadcast on
PBS in 1994. Many of the rights in the eight-part sequel, "Eyes on the
Prize II: America at the Racial Crossroads (1965-1985)," expired five
years after it aired in 1990.

" 'Eyes on the Prize' is one of the most effective
documentaries ever put together that dealt with civic engagement," says
civil rights leader Lawrence Guyot, who led the Mississippi Freedom
Democratic Party and today is a program manager for the D.C. Department
of Human Services. "This is analogous to stopping the circulation of
all the books about Martin Luther King, stopping the circulation of all
the books about Malcolm X, stopping the circulation of books about the
founding of America.

"I would call upon everyone who has access to 'Eyes on the Prize' to openly violate any and all laws regarding its showing."

New Book: Groundwork: Local Black Freedom Movements in America

Over the last several years, the traditional narrative of the civil
rights movement as largely a southern phenomenon, organized primarily
by male leaders, that roughly began with the 1955 Montgomery Bus
Boycott and ended with the Voting Rights Act of 1965, has been
complicated by studies that root the movement in smaller communities
across the country. These local movements had varying agendas and
organizational development, geared to the particular circumstances,
resources, and regions in which they operated. Local civil rights
activists frequently worked in tandem with the national civil rights
movement but often functioned autonomously from—and sometimes even at
odds with—the national movement.

Together, the pathbreaking essays in Groundwork
teach us that local civil rights activity was a vibrant component of
the larger civil rights movement, and contributed greatly to its
national successes. Individually, the pieces offer dramatic new
insights about the civil rights movement, such as the fact that a
militant black youth organization in Milwaukee was led by a white
Catholic priest and in Cambridge, Maryland, by a middle-aged black
woman; that a group of middle-class, professional black women
spearheaded Jackson, Mississippi's movement for racial justice and made
possible the continuation of the Freedom Rides, and that, despite
protests from national headquarters, the Brooklyn chapter of the
Congress of Racial Equality staged a dramatic act of civil disobedience
at the 1964 World's Fair in New York.

No previous volume has enabled readers to examine several different local movements together, and in so doing, Groundwork forges a far more comprehensive vision of the black freedom movement.

Thank You, Patriot

In his book Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community,
Martin Luther King wrote, "And so we shall have to do more than
register and more than vote; we shall have to create leaders who embody
virtues we can respect, who have moral and ethical principles we can
applaud with enthusiasm."  On January 6, 2005, thirty-two courageous
members of Congress, in the face of dismissive rhetoric from the
majority party, challenged the results of the Ohio Electors of the 2004
presidential election in protest of the disenfranchisement of thousands
of Ohio voters, and on behalf of all citizens of the United States of
America.  Their purpose was to begin a dialogue that would culminate in
sorely needed election reform so that the problems in Ohio would never
be repeated in any state.  In so doing, these thirty-two members of
Congress proved themselves to be "leaders who embody virtues we can
respect, who have moral and ethical principles" that we applaud with
great enthusiasm.  This site is the thunderous sound of that applause. 

Born Again Jim Crow, Heather Baum

Who would have thought that on the 40th anniversary of Freedom Summer
and the Voting Rights Act we would be fighting for voting rights for
all of America? I'm sure you understand that vote suppression is not
without historic precedence. The fight for suffrage is elemental to the
peoples history. In our own life times, we know this from the history
of Jim Crow. A system we fought a bloody battle to bring to an end in
the south. We thought it was dead. But it is not. What has happened
during the last three or four election cycles is an attempt to give
birth to a "born again" Jim Crow. The obvious goal is to bring it to a
new era of technological sophistication and spread it throughout the
country...If unchallenged this could lead to a permanent one party
rule. In Minnesota, we managed to beat it back...but I believe we
cannot let this stand. . . .

The Right thinks that if it says something often enough...and loud
enough...that makes it true. I call that having smoke blown up your
ass. The Bush Administration thinks by saying something...over and
over...real loud.. they can "make us think" what they say is true. This
is designed to divide the people..."progressive bashing"...used to be
called "Red Baiting" in the days of Joe McCarthy...It is an old tried
and true method of getting people to look the other way while someone
has their hand in your pocket. We have a lot of work to do, and so I
think we need to be organizing on all fronts. I choose to fight on the
voting rights front, because as my Mothers daughter, and as a veteran
of the Southern Freedom Movement, that is what I have done all my life.
My mother and grandmothers before me fought for suffrage for all..and
so do I.

•Why We Must Question Our Elections, Arlene S.Ash, Ph.D..

I am a
statistician. When I testified about electoral tampering in Martin
County, Florida, in November 2000, I focused exclusively on the fact
that the number of disputed ballots would have changed the outcome.
That was shortsighted. As U.S. newspapers have written about the
Ukraine, an election's outcome may be less important than how it was
conducted. Democratic elections must be verifiably fair.

Before
November 2, several U.S. newspapers pursued concerns about election
integrity. They reported on the vulnerability of electronic voting to
simple errors and malicious hacking, and the unnecessary dangers posed
by non-verifiable touch-screen voting. They exposed obstructionist
maneuvers, such as Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell's telling
election commissioners to reject voter registrations submitted on thin
paper.

Post-election, though, the mainstream media has largely ignored or ridiculed concerns about U.S. electoral errors and fraud. . . .

•Nine members of the House Judiciary Committee Request Formal Committee Hearings And Investigation

We write to you at the very outset of the 109th Congress, to
request that our committee hold hearings and investigate the vital
issue of protecting our citizens right to vote. The right to vote is
the very foundation of our Democracy and is at the core of our
Committee’s jurisdiction, and we can think of no more important or
urgent issue before us than protecting our democratic rights. While the
election is settled, however, our job as legislators on the Judiciary
Committee to make sure that the constitutional right to vote is
protected is just beginning.

•Two Million Americans Are Still Not Free At Last, Matthew Cardinale

The disproportionate racial impact of these laws is
staggering. 1.8 million disenfranchised individuals are Black,
according to the Sentencing Project, based on a figure from 2002. It is
safe to say there are approximately 2 million disenfranchised Black
Americans as of 2005.

Approximately 13% of all adult Black men are disenfranchised in
the U.S. Black males are 7 times more likely to be disenfranchised than
any other demographic group. In Alabama and Florida, 31% of all Black
men are permanently disenfranchised.

According to the recent series of interviews I conducted for The
Sentencing Project, an even greater proportion of Americans may believe
they are unable to vote due to a lack of education about voting
eligibility laws, which vary state by state. In California, for
instance, ex-felons regain the right to vote after completing parole;
but 50% of those I spoke to (25 out of 50) were not aware of that fact.

Troublingly, less than 10% of 50 respondents answered that they
had been educated by officials about their voting eligibility, or the
process for regaining the right to vote, during the judicial process or
while they were in prison or on parole.

(Also see The Sentencing Project.)

Ohio's GOP Attorney General launches revenge attack on Election Protection legal team Steve Rosenfeld and Harvey Wasserman

COLUMBUS -- In a stunning legal attack, Ohio's Republican Attorney
General has moved for sanctions against the four attorneys who sued
George W. Bush et. al. in an attempt to investigate the Buckeye State's
bitterly contested November 2 election.

Robert Fitrakis, Susan Truitt, Cliff Arnebeck and Peter Peckarsky were
named by Attorney General James Petro in a filing with the Ohio Supreme
Court. Petro charges the November Moss v Bush and Moss v. Moyer filings by the Election Protection legal team were "frivolous." Petro is demanding court sanctions and fines.

Moss v. Bush moves on and movement continues Bob Fitrakis, Steve Rosenfeld and Harvey Wasserman

The suit grew out of an Election Day that saw multiple thousands of
Ohioans, particularly minority inner city and young people,
disenfranchised. Public hearings were convened where scores of voters
testified under oath about losing their right to vote or seeing it
attacked and compromised. By December, a half-dozen noted academic
experts freely offered their analysis of the state-certified results,
pointing to anomalies that raised the specter of widespread
vote-counting fraud. While the Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth
Blackwell, who was also the co-chair of the president's Ohio campaign,
obstructed all efforts at discovery and evidence gathering --
preventing those claims of fraud from being validated -- the widespread
and detailed record was sufficient proof for members of Congress to
hold hearings examining the vote and eventually challenge the Electoral
College results on Jan. 6.

"This is not the end, this is merely the end of one state action," said
Cliff Arnebeck, the challenge's lead counsel. "More importantly, it
signals the emergence of a much broader effort where we plan to
investigate and litigate county by county, ward by ward, precinct by
precinct."

Record Of Important Legal Events

This post is intended as a resource tool for those seeking
information on important legal events relating to the Ohio election of
2004, specifically relating to issues of (a) fraud, (b)
disenfranchisment, (c) voter suppression, (d) recount obstruction, and
(e) vote machine tampering. It is a selective compilation of links
which have been posted on this site which relate to such events.

Evidence Of Fraud And Disenfranchisement In Ohio, 2004: A Partial List

This post is intended as a resource tool for those doing factual
research on the Ohio election 2004, specifically relating to issues of
(a) fraud, (b) disenfranchisment, (c) voter suppression, (d) recount
obstruction, and (e) vote machine tampering. It makes no pretense at
comprehensiveness, but is merely an attempt to compile links which have
been posted on this site which either (1) are themselves primary
sources of evidence, or (2) summarize, analyze, or point to, such
sources.

Did the “Liberal Media” Get the 2004 Election All Wrong? Gene C. Gerard

The New York Times, in a special news analysis, announced that “President Bush’s
re-election
is the clearest confirmation yet that America is a center-right
country.” Newsweek was even bolder, reporting not only that the “GOP may be the
majority party for the foreseeable future,” but that “red-state Democrats are a
diminishing breed.” The media even succeeded in encouraging the venerable
Democratic strategist James Carville to say, in an interview only forty-eight
hours after the election, “We are an opposition party and not a particularly
effective one. The Democratic Party died Tuesday.”

Now that two months have passed, the dust has settled, and the election has
finally been concluded (Washington’s gubernatorial election was not decided
until December 30), perhaps it would be worthwhile to look at a few of those red
states. Did the media get it wrong, or at least exaggerate a bit? Were the
Democrats and their values trounced in the election?

TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY, THE WHITE HOUSE, JUNE 16, 1963

I LOOK FORWARD TO PRIVILEGE OF BEING PRESENT AT MEETING TOMORROW AT 4 P.M. LIKELIHOOD EXISTS THAT NEGRO PROBLEM WILL BE LIKE THE WEATHER. EVERYBODY TALKS ABOUT IT BUT NOBODY DOES ANYTHING ABOUT IT. PLEASE DEMAND OF RELIGIOUS LEADERS PERSONAL INVOLVEMENT NOT JUST SOLEMN DECLARATION. WE FORFEIT THE RIGHT TO WORSHIP GOD AS LONG AS WE CONTINUE TO HUMILIATE NEGROES. CHURCHES AND SYNAGOGUES HAVE FAILED. THEY MUST REPENT. ASK OF RELIGIOUS LEADERS TO CALL FOR NATIONAL REPENTANCE AND PERSONAL SACRIFICE. LET RELIGIOUS LEADERS DONATE ONE MONTH'S SALARY TOWARD FUND FOR NEGRO HOUSING AND EDUCATION. I PROPOSE THAT YOU MR. PRESIDENT DECLARE STATE OF MORAL EMERGENCY. A MARSHALL PLAN FOR AID TO NEGROES IS BECOMING A NECESSITY. THE HOUR CALLS FOR HIGH MORAL GRANDEUR AND SPIRITUAL AUDACITY.

--ABRAHAM JOSHUA HESCHEL

(Telegram in response to the President's invitation to a White House meeting of religious leaders to discuss civil rights.)

From: Audrey Franklin (audreyafranklin@comcast.net)

NEVADA INAUGURAL DAY SHOWDOWN AND COURT ROOM DRAMA PROMISED.
Public invited. Details, Patricia Axelrod 775-787-1909

NEVADA LEGAL SHOWDOWN
Patricia Axelrod vs State of Nevada
SET FOR INAUGURATION DAY, JAN 20, 1:30PM,
in the First Judicial Court of the State of Nevada, 885 E. Musser, before Judge William Maddox.

January 20, Carson City, Nevada, 1:30 PM, Judge William Maddox is expected to order Dean Heller, the Nevada Secretary of State, to surrender the public records of the Nevada 2004 Presidential Election to citizen activist/writer Patricia Axelrod. George Bush claimed victory in Nevada and Axelrod says she wants to see in black and white how the State was won. Axelrod sued the State of Nevada December 7 charging The Secretary of State with unlawfully withholding public records. December 21, the State moved to dismiss the case. That same day Judge Maddox gave the Secretary a deadline of January 11 to show just cause – under oath - why the State could not produce the records. A hearing on the matter was set for January 18. On January 11 the Secretary violated the direct court order and produced another motion to dismiss rather than an explanation as to why the State could not produce the records. January 18, Deputy Attorney General Joshua Hicks claiming stomach flue asked the court for a sick day off and requested an extension that Axelrod agreed to until January 20.

George Bush won Nevada by 22,000 votes but Patricia Axelrod believes human malfeasance, malfunctioning electronic voting machines, and simple error may have swayed the election outcome away from John Kerry and she has asked for the records to confirm or deny her hypothesis. Axelrod says she first agreeably asked for the records only resorting to litigation after the Nevada Secretary of State became increasingly hostile to her Public Records request. “I knew it was time to sue when Rhonda Moore, the Nevada Secretary of State in Charge of Elections told me she was charging me $1.00 per page for every copy of every public record she saw fit to release if and when she chose to. Moore drove me to court when she set the Capitol Police on me to silence my objections.”

Axelrod, whose work has earned her a John D. and Catherine T MacArthur Foundation Research and Writing Grant as well as a Project Censored Award, explains that her preliminary investigation into Nevada county and state vote tabulations and outcomes reveals unexplained under and over votes and a disparity between the number of ballots issued and the number of votes cast. There is a significant and unexplained post election increase in the voter’s registration total Axelrod claims, and votes cast in small precincts have disappeared into cyber space.

Nevada Secretary of State, Dean Heller and Attorney General Brain Sandoval are rising Republican stars. Each has been openly publicly supportive of George Bush. Heller frequently campaigned for the Bush re-election. Sandoval, currently under consideration for a Federal Judgeship, headed up the Nevada Bush re-election effort for which he was rewarded with prime time Republican convention face time. “Heller and Sandoval’s serious commitment to the Bush re-election surely helped the President win Nevada says Axelrod, “Inauguration Day is a great day for this suit to come to court.”

On Monday, John Kerry appeared at Boston's annual Martin Luther King Jr. memorial breakfast. At the breakfast he expressed outrage over voting irregularities in Ohio:

"Thousands of people were suppressed in their efforts to vote.
Voting machines were distributed in uneven ways," the former Democratic
nominee told an enthusiastic audience of 1,200 at the Boston Convention
and Exhibition Center in South Boston.

"In Democratic districts, it took people four, five, 11 hours to
vote, while Republicans [went] through in 10 minutes. Same voting
machines, same process, our America," Kerry said. . . .

"My friends, this is not a time to pretend. We're here to celebrate the
life of a man who, if he were here today, would make it clear to us
what our agenda is. And nothing," Kerry said, his voice rising in
anger, "would he make more clear on that agenda than, in a nation that
is willing to spend several hundred million dollars in Iraq to bring
them democracy we cannot tolerate that, here in America, too many
people are denied that democracy."

All things I agree with, of course. But what's despicable about Kerry's statement is that it is intended more for me than for the people whom he speaks about, the voters in Ohio who were disenfranchised. On December 2, 2004, Kerry and the Democratic Party made clear their intentions towards the people in Ohio who got screwed.

On Election Day, the Ohio Democratic Party had brought a case in
federal court due to the long lines in Franklin and Knox Counties. http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/docs/ohio/041102LongLineTROmotion.pdf and http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/docs/ohio/041102LongLinecomplaint.pdf

The only relief sought in the complaint by the Democrats was an
injunction requiring election officials to provide paper ballots or
other alternative means of voting in the affected counties on election
day.

The court issued a temporary restraining order requiring
officials to provide paper ballots or other alternative means of voting
and directed that the polls had to remain open for all voters who had
been in line at 7:30 p.m. http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/docs/ohio/041102LongLineOrder.pdf

The order further provided that it would expire on November 2, 2004, unless good cause were shown to extend it.

On December 2nd the Democratic Party agreed to withdraw its case http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/docs/OhioDems/stipulationofdsm.pdf and made a motion to dismiss its own case http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/docs/OhioDems/dismiss.pdf.

The Democratic advocacy on behalf of the voters was insufficient from the outset and then withdrawn entirely. What else could Kerry and the Democrats have done? Attorney Cliff Arnebeck and the Alliance for Democracy have a few ideas. On January 14, they made a motion to intervene in the case.

The Ohio Democratic Party appears, by its motion to dismiss its
claims against the Franklin County Board of Elections, to have lost
interest in further pursuit of this complaint. Intervenor Ohio
Republican Party and defendant Blackwell appear to be seeking to
nullify the importance of this court’s injunction as an important
precedent for protecting voting rights and according equal protection
of law for all Ohio citizens. Thus, there is no other party in this
action that appears willing to aggressively represent the interest of
the Alliance in protecting the democratic values at issue in this
preceding."

It also sought to supplement the complaint in the suit, alleging that

1. The disproportionally long lines experienced and observed
in Afro-American voting precincts in Columbus, Ohio, on November 2,
2004, were, upon information and belief, a consequence of a statewide
plan executed by Defendants Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell
and the Ohio Republican Party, acting as agents for the Bush-Cheney
Presidential campaign.

2. Such plan and its execution violated the Voting Rights Act and
the other provisions of the federal law, including the 14th Amendment
of the Constitution of the United States.

3. Because such plan was carried out under the auspices of
Defendant Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell, acting in his dual
capacity as Co-Chair of the Bush-Cheney Ohio Presidential campaign,
such plan and its execution constituted a conspiracy to violate the
constitutional rights of targeted Afro-American Ohio citizens under
color of state law in violation of 42 U.S.C. 1983.

4. Defendant Franklin County Board of Elections through its
Director Matthew Damschroder, upon information and belief, testified
incorrectly before the court that nothing could be done to alleviate
the long lines in Franklin County and the Board failed to carry out the
mandate of the Court’s November 2, 2004 injunction, because in fact, in
accordance with the Board’s own records, some 67 voting machines that
could have been used were held back from use by voters.
5. Defendant Blackwell and the Ohio Republican Party, acting as
agents for the Bush-Cheney Presidential campaign, upon information and
belief, engaged in a wide variety of vote suppression techniques and
permitted vote manipulation, by which votes cast by voters for
Presidential candidate John Kerry were counted, in both the initial
count on election day and the recount, as though they had been cast for
Presidential candidate George W. Bush.
6. The conduct of the defendants in violation of law resulted in
the false reporting of the initial election result in the Ohio
Presidential vote, the recount, the certification of Ohio votes by the
Congress of the United States and, unless such fraud is exposed before
the scheduled Inauguration on January 20, 2004, will result in the
second Inauguration of George W. Bush on the basis of an inaccurate
vote count.
7. Title 3 of the United States Code establishing procedures for
certification of votes of the electoral college is unconstitutional as
applied, in this situation where no reasonable and adequate means has
been provided for an adjudication of credible allegations of fraud
supported by and substantial evidence, which fraud is determinative of
the outcome of the election, can be considered and resolved in a public
hearing before such certification.
8. The inauguration of a president on the basis of alleged fraud
as to which the suspected perpetrators and conspirators have not even
been examined under oath, constitutes a deprivation of an important
liberty, namely the franchise to vote, without due process of law.

In addition, the Alliance for Democracy sought an emergency
hearing, and an order granting leave to take the depositions of
Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell, Ohio Republican Party Chairman
Robert Bennett, and Franklin County Board of Elections Director Matthew
Damschroder.

Kerry aides have said that

a political action committee he started after the election -- a
committee that could lay the groundwork for a second presidential
campaign in 2008 -- would also be dedicated to preventing
disenfranchisement.

If John Kerry publically supported the legal battles in Ohio, it would make an enormous difference. His brief appearance at the Martin Luther King Jr memorial breakfast got the issue of voter disenfranchisement onto the front page of the Boston Globe. Kerry has the power to not only legitimize the issue in the eyes of the wider public but to give proper prominence and attention to  people who supported him and were disenfranchised. But Kerry does not want to spend his politial capital on justice for real people. 

So why is Kerry paying high profile lip-service to caring about voting problems? Because he knows that since his premature concession there has been a mass citizens' mobilization in the name of clean, verifiable elections and justice for disenfranchised voters. Barbara Boxer heard that call and stood with twenty-nine Representatives to make an intervention in the name of democracy. John Kerry hid his cowardly face from his would-be supporters. Now that the dust seems to have cleared he's come forward to lead the movement for a true democracy.

Did I say lead? That should say co-opt. John Kerry's  movement is nothing better than a movement to make sure he gets our votes in 2008.

-------------
Photo: Attorney General Thomas F. Reilly (L) and Senator John F. Kerry with others at the Martin Luther King Jr. memorial breakfast yesterday at the Boston Convention and Exhibition Center. (Globe Staff Photo / Goerge Rizer)

Selma, Alabama
March 25, 1965
(audio excerpt)
(source)

My dear and abiding friends, Ralph Abernathy, and to all of the distinguished Americans seated here on the rostrum, my friends and co-workers of the state of Alabama, and to all of the freedom-loving people who have assembled here this afternoon from all over our nation and from all over the world: Last Sunday, more than eight thousand of us started on a mighty walk from Selma, Alabama. We have walked through desolate valleys and across the trying hills. We have walked on meandering highways and rested our bodies on rocky byways. Some of our faces are burned from the outpourings of the sweltering sun. Some have literally slept in the mud. We have been drenched by the rains.

Our bodies are tired and our feet are somewhat sore. But today as I stand before you and think back over that great march, I can say, as Sister Pollard said-a seventy-year-old Negro woman who lived in this community during the bus boycott-and one day, she was asked while walking if she didn't want to ride. And when she answered, "No," the person said, "Well, aren't you tired?" And with her ungrammatical profundity, she said, "My feets is tired, but my soul is rested." And in a real sense this afternoon, we can say that our feet are tired, but our souls are rested.

They told us we wouldn't get here. And there were those who said that we would get here only over their dead bodies, but all the world today knows that we are here and we are standing before the forces of power in the state of Alabama saying, "We ain't goin' let nobody turn us around."

Now it is not an accident that one of the great marches of American history should terminate in Montgomery, Alabama. Just ten years ago, in this very city, a new philosophy was born of the Negro struggle. Montgomery was the first city in the South in which the entire Negro community united and squarely faced its age-old oppressors. Out of this struggle, more than bus [de]segregation was won; a new idea, more powerful than guns or clubs was born. Negroes took it and carried it across the South in epic battles that electrified the nation and the world.

Yet, strangely, the climactic conflicts always were fought and won on Alabama soil. After Montgomery's, heroic confrontations loomed up in Mississippi, Arkansas, Georgia, and elsewhere. But not until the colossus of segregation was challenged in Birmingham did the conscience of America begin to bleed. White America was profoundly aroused by Birmingham because it witnessed the whole community of Negroes facing terror and brutality with majestic scorn and heroic courage. And from the wells of this democratic spirit, the nation finally forced Congress to write legislation in the hope that it would eradicate the stain of Birmingham. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 gave Negroes some part of their rightful dignity, but without the vote it was dignity without strength.

Once more the method of nonviolent resistance was unsheathed from its scabbard, and once again an entire community was mobilized to confront the adversary. And again the brutality of a dying order shrieks across the land. Yet, Selma, Alabama, became a shining moment in the conscience of man. If the worst in American life lurked in its dark streets, the best of American instincts arose passionately from across the nation to overcome it. There never was a moment in American history more honorable and more inspiring than the pilgrimage of clergymen and laymen of every race and faith pouring into Selma to face danger at the side of its embattled Negroes.

The confrontation of good and evil compressed in the tiny community of Selma generated the massive power to turn the whole nation to a new course. A president born in the South had the sensitivity to feel the will of the country, and in an address that will live in history as one of the most passionate pleas for human rights ever made by a president of our nation, he pledged the might of the federal government to cast off the centuries-old blight. President Johnson rightly praised the courage of the Negro for awakening the conscience of the nation.

On our part we must pay our profound respects to the white Americans who cherish their democratic traditions over the ugly customs and privileges of generations and come forth boldly to join hands with us. From Montgomery to Birmingham, from Birmingham to Selma, from Selma back to Montgomery, a trail wound in a circle long and often bloody, yet it has become a highway up from darkness. Alabama has tried to nurture and defend evil, but evil is choking to death in the dusty roads and streets of this state. So I stand before you this afternoon with the conviction that segregation is on its deathbed in Alabama, and the only thing uncertain about it is how costly the segregationists and Wallace will make the funeral.

Our whole campaign in Alabama has been centered around the right to vote. In focusing the attention of the nation and the world today on the flagrant denial of the right to vote, we are exposing the very origin, the root cause, of racial segregation in the Southland. Racial segregation as a way of life did not come about as a natural result of hatred between the races immediately after the Civil War. There were no laws segregating the races then. And as the noted historian, C. Vann Woodward, in his book, The Strange Career of Jim Crow, clearly points out, the segregation of the races was really a political stratagem employed by the emerging Bourbon interests in the South to keep the southern masses divided and southern labor the cheapest in the land. You see, it was a simple thing to keep the poor white masses working for near-starvation wages in the years that followed the Civil War. Why, if the poor white plantation or mill worker became dissatisfied with his low wages, the plantation or mill owner would merely threaten to fire him and hire former Negro slaves and pay him even less. Thus, the southern wage level was kept almost unbearably low.

Toward the end of the Reconstruction era, something very significant happened. That is what was known as the Populist Movement. The leaders of this movement began awakening the poor white masses and the former Negro slaves to the fact that they were being fleeced by the emerging Bourbon interests. Not only that, but they began uniting the Negro and white masses into a voting bloc that threatened to drive the Bourbon interests from the command posts of political power in the South.

To meet this threat, the southern aristocracy began immediately to engineer this development of a segregated society. I want you to follow me through here because this is very important to see the roots of racism and the denial of the right to vote. Through their control of mass media, they revised the doctrine of white supremacy. They saturated the thinking of the poor white masses with it, thus clouding their minds to the real issue involved in the Populist Movement. They then directed the placement on the books of the South of laws that made it a crime for Negroes and whites to come together as equals at any level. And that did it. That crippled and eventually destroyed the Populist Movement of the nineteenth century.

If it may be said of the slavery era that the white man took the world and gave the Negro Jesus, then it may be said of the Reconstruction era that the southern aristocracy took the world and gave the poor white man Jim Crow. He gave him Jim Crow. And when his wrinkled stomach cried out for the food that his empty pockets could not provide, he ate Jim Crow, a psychological bird that told him that no matter how bad off he was, at least he was a white man, better than the black man. And he ate Jim Crow. And when his undernourished children cried out for the necessities that his low wages could not provide, he showed them the Jim Crow signs on the buses and in the stores, on the streets and in the public buildings. And his children, too, learned to feed upon Jim Crow, their last outpost of psychological oblivion.

Thus, the threat of the free exercise of the ballot by the Negro and the white masses alike resulted in the establishment of a segregated society. They segregated southern money from the poor whites; they segregated southern mores from the rich whites; they segregated southern churches from Christianity they segregated southern minds from honest thinking; and they segregated the Negro from everything. That's what happened when the Negro and white masses of the South threatened to unite and build a great society: a society of justice where none would pray upon the weakness of others; a society of plenty where greed and poverty would be done away; a society of brotherhood where every man would respect the dignity and worth of human personality.
[click to continue…]

Posted on Sat, Jan. 15, 2005
One man pursued justice for all
By Kathleen Parker
ORLANDO SENTINEL

As the world weighs in against media hubris, often well-deserved, it's bracing to note some of the good that gets done on the fringes in the name of principle rather than in the klieg-seeking interest of self-acclaim.

Meet Jerry Mitchell, 45, investigative reporter for The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Miss., the man whose 16-year personal mission is largely credited for the upcoming trial of the man charged with murdering three civil rights workers 40 years ago.

Thanks to Mitchell's labors - and to others he insists deserve much credit - state authorities have charged Ku Klux Klan leader Edgar Ray Killen, a sawmill operator and preacher, with the 1964 murders of Michael Schwerner, Andrew Goodman and James Chaney.

Killen, 79, is the first person ever charged with the murders, though he and others were tried in 1967 on federal conspiracy charges in the killings. Killen walked.

The story of the three victims, who were part of Freedom Summer's drive to register black voters, is familiar by now. Mitchell's story may be less so.

It is fair to say that without Mitchell's dogged and often courageous reporting, not to mention an apparently beguiling charm that convinces people they should share secret records with him, many murders from the civil rights era would have remained unvindicated, locked forever in the vaults of regional amnesia.

[click to continue…]

This came through the Coalition Against Election Fraud e-mail list. I strongly support this call to action (emphasis added).

For all those who would like to be protesting in Washington on Inauguration Day but will not be able to attend, this is a call to organize "Investigate Ohio" rallies at noon on Thursday, Jan. 20 at the office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation nearest you.

We see the purpose of the rallies not only to protest what appears to be the second illegitimate inauguration of George W. Bush, but more importantly to push the FBI to fully investigate the evidence of widespread vote rigging in Ohio, and by inference in other states, as documented in the historic "Preserving Democracy: What Went Wrong in Ohio" (pdf), published by the House Judiciary Committee's Democratic staff, under the leadership of Congressman John Conyers Jr.

The report, which has received no significant press attention, found: "...massive and unprecedented voter irregularities and anomalies in Ohio. In many cases these irregularities were caused by intentional misconduct and illegal behavior..."

The report also said: "...Cumulatively, these irregularities, which affected hundreds of thousands of votes and voters in Ohio, raise grave doubts regarding whether it can be said the Ohio electors, selected on December 13, 2004, were chosen in a manner that conforms to Ohio law, let alone federal requirements and constitutional standards."

Laws apparently violated include: The Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act of 1968, Equal Protection, Due Process and Ohio right to vote laws. This, of course, means that there is likely no legitimacy to the 2004 Bush "election".

In spite of the exceptional documentation in the Conyers report, which formed the basis for objections to Congressional approval of the Ohio presidential vote on Jan. 6, by Barbara Boxer in the Senate and 31 House members, the FBI has failed to investigate the apparent widespread violations of Federal law.

Indeed, as of earlier this week, the FBI failed to answer a December 15 request by Congressman Conyers for investigation of possible tampering with Ohio voting machines by the firm Triad. The FBI has made no response to a request of investigation of the Presidential vote in Ohio, Florida and other states, made on December 3 by citizens of Westchester County, New York. Congressman Conyers continues to seek FBI action and to call for a full investigation of Ohio by Congress.

We see the rallies as a way of not only specifically supporting Congressman Conyers, but to thank Senator Boxer and the House members who had the courage to object to "Ohio" and by implication, the election and inauguration of George W. Bush. The rallies, further, would thank the hundreds of citizens who have worked tirelessly in Ohio, Florida and a number of other states to document and publicize widespread voter disenfranchisement.

Congressman Conyers' appears to be the only initiative now available that could result in convictions for Ohio voter disenfranchisment. It can be argued that there is no way to prevent further schemes for disenfranchisement without convictions for what happened in Ohio.

We recommend that you read the Conyers report, which can be found at http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/, because it documents specific steps that were taken in Ohio to dismantle the franchise, particularly for black voters and also, to a lesser degree, for low-income and young voters.

In Ohio, and other key states, the challenge for Republican officials, party workers and consultants was to counteract the highly effective voter registration drives aimed at likely supporters of Democratic candidates.

The Conyers report shows that Ohio Republicans moved to meet this challenge in a number of well-conceived, systematic, illegal steps that exploited weaknesses in the state voting system, including: failure to put adequate numbers of voting machines in precincts where a high Democratic turnout was expected, particularly black precincts; manipulation of provisional ballots; voter intimidation; misinformation to voters; and manipulation of voting machines.

A particularly interesting incident, that one would think would spark FBI interest, is cited in the Conyers report:

"In Franklin County, a worker at the Holiday Inn observed a team of 25 people who called themselves the 'Texas Strike Force' using payphones to make intimidating calls to likely voters, targeting people recently in the prison system. The 'Texas Strike Force' members paid their way to Ohio, but their hotel accomodations were paid for by the Ohio Republican Party, whose headquarters is across the street. The hotel worker heard one caller threaten a likely voter with being reported to the FBI and returning to jail if he voted. Another hotel worker called the police, who came but did nothing."

It is essential that we demand justice in Ohio, and other states.

For additional information, please contact: Nick Mottern (914)806-6179, Investigate N-02.

A young protester's life-altering decision
SOUTH BEND TRIBUNE
SUNDAY PUNCH

"The Children" (Random House, 1998) is David Halberstam's story of the college students who came together in Nashville, Tenn., in the Rev. James Lawson's workshops on nonviolence in the 1960s. They took part in the first sit-ins at the city's lunch rooms. And later, as Freedom Riders, they helped carry the struggle to end segregation into the deep South.

The following excerpt comes from the book's opening pages. Halberstam focuses on 21-year-old Diane Nash, a Chicagoan attending Fisk University.

Nash's outrage at restrooms marked "White Only" and "Colored" she first encountered at the Tennessee State Fair kindled her passionate desire for change and led her to try Lawson's workshops in nonviolence as a means to achieve it. Her peers soon singled her out as a leader.

The introductory chapter's first and last paragraphs quoted below describe Nash's personal struggle to turn her commitment to nonviolence into more than an idea, into an empowering strategic practice and a testament to her identity in the very face of violence.

Halberstam writes that Nash felt deeply afraid on Feb. 20, when she was acting as a control person for that day's protest, her job similar to "the communications men in war, the eyes and ears of the headquarters." But by then, white marauders knew who she was and shouted, " 'She's the one to get!' "

Her moral and spiritual crisis that day became a turning point in Nash's life.

Years later though she could recall almost every physical detail of what it had been like to sit there in that course on English literature, Diane Nash could remember nothing of what Professor Robert Hayden had said. What she remembered instead was her fear. A large clock on the wall had clicked slowly and loudly; each minute which was subtracted put her nearer to harm's way. What she remembered about the class in the end was her inability to concentrate, and the fact that both her hands were soaked with sweat by the end of the class and left the clear handprint of fear on the wooden desk. It was always the last class that she attended on the days that she and her colleagues assembled before they went downtown and challenged the age-old segregation laws at the lunch counters in Nashville's downtown shopping center. No matter how much she steeled herself, no matter how much she believed in what they were doing, the anticipatory fear never left her. ...

... She knew she had to make a decision and make it quickly. If she failed here, she would have to leave the Movement. She sat down for a time (on a downtown corner when her panic became overwhelming), and gradually her ability to breathe came back. She thought about how important the sit-ins had become to her; she realized that this was the most important thing she had ever done, and perhaps more valuable than anything she might ever do again. Overnight, because of the sit-ins, she had felt of value to herself. Therefore she had to go forward -- she owed it not just to the others but, in a way she had never felt before, to herself. She would be extremely careful in every decision she made -- there would be no recklessness. But she would not turn back. If something terrible was going to happen to her, she decided, let it happen when she was doing something she believed in. She got up and walked back to her job.

The daring of nonviolence
Civil rights activist Diane Nash is sure it has power to disarm injustice
SOUTH BEND TRIBUNE
SUNDAY PUNCH
By HOWARD DUKES
Tribune Staff Writer

For a young person ready to join the fight to end segregation in Nashville, Tenn., the Rev. James Lawson's civil disobedience workshops were the only game in town.

After a humiliating encounter with Jim Crow segregation at the Tennessee State Fair, Diane Nash wanted in. Still, Nash, a native of Chicago who came south to attend Fisk University in 1959, wasn't sure the concept Lawson was teaching -- nonviolent protest -- could work in America.

Lawson, a pacifist and true believer in nonviolent protest, was imprisoned for 13 months during the Korean War for refusing to be inducted into the military. After his release, he spent four years in India, where Mohandas Gandhi had led a successful nonviolent revolution against British rule. While there, he followed the Montgomery, Ala., bus boycott led by the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.

Lawson would eventually enroll in Vanderbilt University's divinity school as a doctoral student. Soon after arriving in Nashville, he began training students in Gandhi's tactics of nonviolent direct action.

Nash started attending Lawson's seminars, which eventually evolved into the sit-ins, after hearing about them.

"I felt outraged (by the blatant racism), and I started looking for organizations that were doing something," Nash says.

But even though Lawson appeared to be doing something, she remained skeptical.

Nash, leader of the 1960 sit-in movement that opened lunch counters in downtown Nashville to blacks, wasn't sure a group of young people could change the system.

She wasn't sure that Lawson respected his young charges enough to surrender control. And she wondered if Lawson would waver if the sit-ins got him expelled from school or subjected to physical harm.

"It was years before I was convinced," says Nash, now a real estate agent in Chicago.

But Nash also was afraid. Even though she quickly emerged as the group's unofficial leader, she wondered if she could withstand the pressure.

Lawson soon started training the students in how they should conduct themselves during the sit-ins. The training involved role playing, which often got rough. Students were cursed, spat upon, had cups of water and food thrown at them. They practiced being pushed and punched. They practiced stifling the urge to fight back or run away.

But no amount of role playing could prepare them for being arrested, and Nash feared jail as much as she feared being attacked by angry mobs of counterprotesters.

"I can remember one time we were in training, and we started talking about going to jail, and I could not imagine myself going to jail," Nash says.

Afterward, Nash says she told some people that she would help in any other way but she wouldn't do anything that would get her arrested.

"I said, 'I'll type, I'll do telephone work, I'll do anything, but I'm not going to jail,' " Nash recalls.

Not wanting to let the other members of the group, who had become her friends, down, she eventually decided to participate and to take the risk of going to jail.
[click to continue…]

January 15, 2005
Joanne Grant, 74; Documented Grassroots Efforts on Civil Rights
New York Times
By JENNIFER BAYOT

Joanne Grant, an activist who documented the grassroots efforts behind the civil rights movement through her journalism, filmmaking and commentary, died on Sunday at St. Vincent's Midtown Hospital. She was 74 and lived in Manhattan.

The cause was heart failure, her son, Mark Rabinowitz, said.

Ms. Grant wrote "Black Protest" (Fawcett, 1968), a documentary analysis of black resistance from 1619 on. One of the first books to trace the origins of the civil rights movement, it remains required reading in many classes on African-American history.

A former assistant to W. E. B. DuBois, Ms. Grant sought to profile the struggle for civil rights through its community leaders. Her award-winning documentary film "Fundi: The Story of Ella Baker" (1981), about an unsung matriarch of the civil rights movement, was broadcast nationally on PBS. She later wrote "Ella Baker: Freedom Bound" (Wiley, 1998), a biography. In "Confrontation on Campus" (New American Library, 1969), she described sit-ins at Columbia University and elsewhere.

"She was an important voice in the early writing on the civil rights movement," said Evelyn Brooks Higginbotham, a professor of African-American studies at Harvard. "Scholars began to realize that you couldn't understand how this became a national phenomenon unless you understood how communities rallied around issues."

Friends described Ms. Grant as the movement's publicist and said she saw herself as both journalist and advocate. She was a member of the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee in the 1960's and in later years organized benefits for social causes and political candidates.

In the 1960's, as a reporter for The National Guardian, she often traveled to rural Southern towns to describe demonstrations and organizations that other publications largely ignored.

"She exposed and explained the civil rights movement in ways that the daily press either couldn't or wouldn't," said Julian Bond, chairman of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.

Joanne Grant Rabinowitz, whose father was white and mother biracial, was born in Utica, N.Y., on March 30, 1930. She graduated from Syracuse University with a degree in history and journalism.

In addition to her son, Mark, of Manhattan, she is survived by her husband, Victor Rabinowitz, a lawyer and activist; a daughter, Abby, of Hamburg, N.J.; a stepson, Peter, of Clinton, N.Y.; a stepdaughter, Joni, of Pittsburgh; a half-sister, Mary Jane Hubbard of Norwich, N.Y.; a half-brother, James Hubbard of Orlando, Fla.; and two step-grandchildren.

Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company