Malcolm X’s diary swiped, nearly auctioned

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


The bullet-ridden and blood-stained diary of Malcolm X, which had been in his coat pocket when he was assassinated, turned up on the Butterfield & Butterfield auction block in May, much to the dismay of officials at the New York Municipal Archives, in whose custody it was supposed to be, says THE VILLAGE VOICE.

The FBI is now investigating the case to determine how the diary, part of a vast collection of evidence in the assassination case, was removed from the archive in the first place. The FBI was tipped off by the VOICE when the newspaper called the bureau about the planned auction. Butterfield’s, which refused to identify the seller of the diary, had planned to start the bidding at $50,000.

http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/9929/bastone.shtml

BSB

_
INS frees woman fleeing genital mutilation

July 21

A 29-year-old woman who fled Ghana for the United States to avoid ritual genital mutilation was freed by court order INS after spending two years in a INS detention cell, according to the ASSOCIATED PRESS. The INS had arrested Adelaide Abankwah when she arrived seeking amnesty in 1997.

Abankwah told INS officials that if she were to return to her home, tribal leaders would kill her or perform ritual genital mutilation as punishment for having lost her virginity before marriage.

The INS had threatened to deport Abankwah before it had even decided whether to grant her request or not. An appeals court ordered the INS to free her while it deliberated over her request. The court cited existing INS precedent which stipulates that genital mutilation is legitimate persecution and sound basis to grant amnesty. The INS still hasn’t decided on the case, and could still deport Abankwah.

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/headlines/ap/…

BSB

_
Fuel economy makes for unsafe cars

July 20

A study just released by the Competitive Enterprise Institute reveals the bitter irony of the law of unintended consequences. According to the ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS NETWORK, the study reports that fuel economy standards adopted to reduce American dependence on foreign oil in the 1970s have opened the door for automakers to build small, unsafe cars that result in 2,600 to 4,500 deaths per year.

Environmentalists argue that the standards do not force the industry to build unsafe cars — they build them to reduce costs and increase profits. The study’s authors shoot back that building smaller cars are the easiest way to increase fuel efficiency — and a sure way to reduce safety.

The study may play a role in the debate over new fuel standards. Environmentalists support the standards because they say they will help prevent global warming. In fact, they are currently pushing policymakers to toughen fuel efficiency standards — demanding that cars get even more miles to the gallon. Bad idea, say this study’s authors. Raising the standards will further encourage the manufacture of small, dangerous cars and thereby increase auto deaths to between 3,800 and 5,700 deaths per year. If policymakers believe the study, they may find themselves directly between a rock and a very hard place.

http://enn.com/news/enn-stories…

LS

_
Space nerds dreamed up SDI policy

July 19

The original idea for Ronald Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative, a.k.a. Star Wars — which aimed to construct a virtual shield that would protect the U.S. from incoming missiles — was actually dreamed up by a bunch of science-fiction writers, writes Norman Spinrad in LE MONDE.

Spinrad, who is himself a science-fiction writer, recounts the early 1980s as a time when many space enthusiasts were frustrated by cuts in NASA’s budget and the possibility that space exploration would be confined to “low Earth orbit.” He claims that the Citizens’ Advisory Council on National Space Policy — headed by a politically-connected sci-fi writer named Jerry Pournelle and composed of other writers, space industry executives, and scientists — aimed to influence the Reagan administration’s space policy. At the time, Spinrad claims, Pournelle knew Reagan’s National Security Advisor Richard Allen. Through Allen, the Council was given “direct access to the highest levels” of the government.

According to the article, the Council managed to convince the Reagan administration that the Pentagon (which had a much larger budget than NASA) should fund the construction of a space shield to protect the country from enemy missiles. The idea was simple: The Pentagon gets a new defense toy, and the space geeks get a whole new shot at deep space exploration.

http://www.monde-diplomatique.fr/en/1999/07/?…

j.r.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate