Providing evidence of KNOWLEDGE of USA Officials, their Legal Counsel and CO-Conspirators, etc. regarding the CRIMINAL Charges being brought against them and “HOW” they RETALIATED and CONSPIRED to have Witnesses ASSASSINATED / KILLED / MURDERED, etc. for purposes of avoiding PROSECUTION for: (1) WAR Crimes, (2) Crimes Against HUMANITY and (3) Other Atrocities, etc.

Click on the Count to view a brief description of the Criminal Charges.  Please note, we look forward to providing a brief description for each Count as time allows.  Therefore, please feel free to return to review updates.

As of 05/27/2023, Cut and Pasted From:

https://www.siphiwebaleka.com/blog/2020/2/7/after-brown-vs-board-of-education-haile-selassie-malcolm-x-martin-luther-king-repatriation-and-the-oaau

FEBRUARY 7, 2020

AFTER BROWN VS. BOARD OF EDUCATION: HAILE SELASSIE, MALCOLM X, MARTIN LUTHER KING, REPATRIATION AND THE OAAU

In 2003, I succeeded to the legacy of Malcolm X inherited at the Organization of African Unity (OAU) by being the lone African American at the African Union (AU) when they amended its constitution to include the African Diaspora. . . I received the same instructions that Malcolm X received, and started the same work that he started. . . .

THE HIGH-POINT OF US-AFRICAN RELATIONS: BROWN VS. BOARD OF EDUCATION DECISION AND THE VISIT OF HIS IMPERIAL MAJESTY, EMPEROR HAILE SELASSIE I OF ETHIOPIA.

It has already been stated that His Imperial Majesty’s Visit to the United States in 1954 marked the high-point of US-Africa relations. This was represented by the US-Ethiopia Mutual Defense Agreement and the establishment of the Kagnew communications facility which became the major US sigint ("signal intelligence") listening station monitoring all High Frequency radio messages. It was also represented in the linking of the civil rights struggle of Africans in American with the struggle for African Liberation on the African Continent. Sundiata Acoli, an Afrikan Liberation soldier imprisoned in America, writes:

“Afrikans from Afrika, having fought to save European independence, returned to the Afrikan continent and began fighting for the independence of their own colonized nations. Rather than fight losing Afrikan colonial wars, most European nations opted to grant ‘phased’ independence to their African colonies. The US now faced the prospect of thousands of Afrikan diplomatic personnel, their staff, and families coming to the UN and wandering into a minefield of incidents, particularly on state visits to the rigidly segregated [Washington] DC capital. That alone could push each newly emerging independent Afrikan nation into the socialist column. To counteract this possibility, the US decided to desegregate. As a result, on May 17, 1954, the US Supreme Court declared school segregation illegal.”

Just prior to His Imperial Majesty’s arrival in the United States, an editorial in the Ethiopian Herald newspaper of May 22, 1954 stated, “So intermeshed are the interests of our present day world that whatever happens in one part may have repercussions in wide areas elsewhere. The United States Supreme Court’s decision last Monday on segregated state schools in that country takes its place in this category of events.” Sensitive to embarrassment before the world that the spectre of racial segregation, particularly in education, might have during the visit of a Black Emperor of Ethiopia, the US passed the Brown vs. Board of Education decision when it did, just one week before His Imperial Majesty’s arrival, in order to “show off” the progress the US was making in race relations. According to the United States Government's Amicus Curiae brief to the US Supreme Court,

“It is in the context of the present world struggle between freedom and tyranny that the problem of racial discrimination must be viewed . . . For discrimination against minority groups in the US has an adverse effect upon our relations with other countries. Racial discrimination furnishes grist for the Communist propaganda mills, and it raises doubts even among friendly nations as to the integrity of our devotion to the democratic faith.”

The Chicago Defender newspaper ran an article during His Imperial Majesty’s visit entitled “Integration On Display For Selassie At Capital” and stated that,

“Colored Washingtonians were much in evidence both in official and non official capacities here Wednesday as the nation’s capital greeted Emperor Haile Selassie, the Emperor of Ethiopia. . . . The government lost no opportunity to present colored Americans in a favorable light during the Emperor’s stay here. It was obvious that the state department realized that his visit on the heels of the Supreme Court decision offered a good opportunity to counter Communist racial propaganda which has plagued this nation in world forums.”

A Cleveland Call and Post editorial stated that, “The nation’s Chief Executive [President Eisenhower] has repeatedly stated that the stigma of racial discrimination is the greatest weakness in our defense against world communism . . . .” Addressing the issue after receiving an Honorary Doctorate of Laws from Howard University on May 28, Emperor Haile Selassie said, “the World is becoming increasingly aware of the importance of contributions made by colored peoples everywhere to higher and broader standards of social concepts. Events of the recent days, here in the United States, have brilliantly confirmed before the world the contributions which you have made to the principle that all men are brothers and equal in the sight of God.”

Asked by a reporter at a New York Press Conference on June 1, 1954 what he thought about the recent United States Supreme Court decision outlawing racial segregation in the public schools, His Imperial Majesty Haile Selassie replied,

“This historic court decision resting on your Constitution will win the esteem of the entire world for the United States. And in particular, it will win the esteem of all the colored people of the world.”

Asked the same question in San Francisco on June 14, His Imperial Majesty said, “The decision will not only strengthen the ties between Ethiopia and the United States, but will also win friends everywhere in the world.”

Another article, which appeared on June 8, 1954, was headlined, “Emperor Selassie Links Negro With Africans Throughout World.” According to the Chicago Defender, Haile Selassie’s Special Message to the African in America:

“My message to the colored people of the United States is that they continue to press forward with determination their social and intellectual advancement, meeting all obstacles with Christian courage and tolerance, confident in the certainty of the eventual triumph of justice and equality throughout the world. The people of Ethiopia feel the strongest bond of sympathy and understanding with the colored people of the United States. We greatly admire your achievements and your contributions to American life and the tremendous development of this great nation.”

Just before the start of Haile Selassie’s visit to the US, the British in East Africa launched “Operation Anvil” against the mounting strength of the African Freedom Fighters called “Mau Mau”. More than 40,000 British troops captured 26,500 “suspects” and held them in concentration camps.

General Musa Mwariama and Kenyan President Jomo Kenyatta

Just over a year later, on December 1, 1955, Rosa Parks embodied that courage and determination and defied Montgomery, Alabama’s bus segregation laws by refusing to give her seat to the white man, kicking off the civil rights movement in America. By 1957, Ghana had become the first African nation to achieve its independence.

By January 4, 1965, the New York Times was reporting that Malcolm X had gotten 33 African Heads of State to support his Organization of Afro American Unity (OAAU) petition to the United Nations and that the US State Department, the CIA and the FBI noticed that African leaders were now openly attacking the US.

Malcolm X and Ghana President Kwame Nkrumah

By February 16, 1965, Malcolm X was denouncing the 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education decision as “Tokenism”:

“From 1954 to 1964 can easily be looked upon as the era of the emerging African state. And as the African state emerged . . . what effect did it have on the Black American? When he saw the Black man on the [African] continent taking a stand, it made him become filled with the desire to take a stand . . . Just as [the US] had to change their approach with the people on the African continent, they also began to change their approach with our people on this continent. As they used tokenism . . . on the African continent . . . they began to do the same thing with us here in the States . . . . Tokenism . . . every move they made was a token move . . . . They came up with a Supreme Court decision that they haven’t put into practice yet. Not even in Rochester, much less in Mississippi.”

Relentlessly seeking to educate the African in America about Africa, Malcolm X began making Africa’s independence struggle and its relationship to the civil rights struggle a focus of his speeches.

Malcolm X was killed on February 21, 1965. Two weeks later, the New York Times ran a story headlined

“World Court Opens Africa Case Monday” which stated that “The International Court of Justice will open oral proceedings Monday in a case linking the segregation struggle of the American Negro and the fate of 430,000 African Bantus and bushmen . . . .

At issue is a four-year effort by Ethiopia and Liberia to bar South Africa from applying her race separation or apartheid doctrine in South West Africa which she controls. The two African complainants, searching for arguments to defeat race-separation policy, have hit on the obvious parallels between the two separations. Almost certainly they will cite the American school segregation cases beginning with the history making decision of May, 1954 in Brown vs. Board of Education, in which the Supreme Court found that separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.”

Just before Malcolm X’s murder, Burundi Prime Minister, Pierre Ngendandumwe, a major supporter of the OAAU petition, was assassinated by Gonzlave Muyinzi, a man who worked at the US Embassy where the CIA was located. Four days after Malcolm X’s murder, a Kenyan government official who supported the OAAU petition was assassinated.

Regarding the South West Africa case at the International Court of Justice, at issue was the policy of racial segregation. The San, Khoihoi, Ovambo and Herero tribes lived in general isolation from Europeans until Portuguese explorer Batolomeau Dias landed in 1488. He was followed by hunters, missionaries, explorers and a small number of British and American whalers. The Dutch took over the only deep water port in Namibia (Walvis Bay) but this was taken over by the British in the 18th century. A German merchant called “Ledertitz” set up a town on the coast and it was from this foothold that German South West Africa was established in 1884. In the next three decades, the Germans bought or stole all the land of the natives, and bloodily suppressed African resistance. The biggest uprising against the Germans was made by the Herero, whose revolt in 1904 cost 60,000 lives becoming the first genocide of the Twentieth Century. In 1915, during World War I, the German Colony was conquered by military forces of South Africa. Germany renounced sovereignty over the region in the Treaty of Versailles, and in 1920 the League of Nations granted South Africa a mandate over the territory. The “mandate” stated that the wellbeing and development of those peoples in former enemy colonies not yet able to stand by themselves formed a “sacred trust of civilization” and that “the tutelage of such peoples should be entrusted to advanced nations . . . who are willing to accept it.” This meant that the racist white minority of South Africa had, under the Covenant of the League of Nations, accepted the responsibility to do the utmost to promote the material and moral well-being and the social progress of the inhabitants of the country.

In 1946 the United Nations General Assembly requested South Africa to submit a trusteeship agreement to the UN to replace the mandate of the defunct League of Nations; South Africa refused to do so. In 1949, a South African constitutional amendment extended parliamentary representation (and thereby the racist policy of apartheid) to South West Africa. The International Court of Justice, however, ruled in 1950 that the status of the mandate could be changed only with the consent of the UN. South Africa subsequently refused to accede to UN demands concerning a trusteeship arrangement. Aroused by the steps that the government of South Africa was taking to establish apartheid in the mandated territory,. Ethiopia and Liberia took the case to the International Court of Justice. It was their contention that, since the Brown vs. Board of Education decision ruled that racial segregation was unfair, did not promote the material and moral well-being and social progress of blacks, and violated their human rights, then applying racial segregation in the form of apartheid in South West Africa could not be said to promote the moral and material well-being and social progress to the black people in that territory, and thus, South West Africa should be granted their independence.

On December 7, 1960, HIM Haile Selassie remarked, in response to a toast by Liberian President William Tubman, that

 

“This same spirit of collaboration on problems of mutual concern continuing at an accelerated pace today in the policies which these two African states are pursuing to the end of eradicating racial discrimination, that ignoble and most infamous of prejudices, from the face of the earth. Ethiopia and Liberia are today pressing a legal action before the International Court of Justice at the Hague, for the lifting of the mandate held by the Republic of South Africa over the territory of South-West Africa. We re-affirm here now our determination to pursue this course to its successful conclusion.”

On February 2, 1962, HIM Haile Selassie said,

“The apartheid policy of the racist government of the white minority in South Africa continues to subject our African brothers, who constitute the overwhelming majority in that country, to untold humiliation and oppression . . . . the unfortunate condition in which our African brothers find themselves in South-West Africa under the notorious and deplorable policy of apartheid and ruthless administration of South Africa is equally depressing and intolerable. However, we are convinced that before long the continued efforts of the United Nations and the legal proceedings instituted at the International Court of Justice by our Government and that of our sister state Liberia will bear fruit.”

Then, on May 26, 1965, just two months after the murder of Malcolm X and the New York Times article announcing the start of the South West Africa case and linking it with Malcolm X’s petition to the United Nations, HIM Haile Selassie said,

“In South Africa and South West Africa, the policies of apartheid and oppression are becoming increasingly unbearable. The South African Government [note: like the US Government Federal Bureau of Investigations Counter-Intelligence Program or COINTELPRO] is accelerating its ruthless campaign: a methodological campaign of arresting daily, detaining without trial and torturing the Africans and their leaders who are struggling for their fundamental human rights and freedom. All the peace-loving countries of the world must act together to force the colonial governments of South Africa and Portugal to desist from these policies - policies which are inhuman, policies which are detrimental to the peace and security of the ENTIRE WORLD - and grant independence and freedom to these oppressed people.”

Posted on or about 04/17/2015 at:https://www.slideshare.net/VogelDenise/041815-petition-for-revolutionary-overthrow-of-the-united-states-of-americas-government

A year later, while at the Organization of African Unity on July 7, 1966, HIM Haile Selassie said,

“You are meeting today in this very Hall which gave birth to the Organization of African Unity barely two and a half years ago in order to consider and find a solution to the Southern Rhodesian situation which has posed a grave challenge not only to the OAU but also to the independence of Our individual states and indeed to the national liberation movements of Angola, Mozambique, South West Africa, South Africa, . . . All forces of good, wherever they may be found, must be mobilized to uproot the white supremacists in Rhodesia and in Southern Africa. All freedom loving peoples must co-operate to destroy this deadly cancer of human liberty and equality. After all, at issue is not the loss of freedom to four million Africans but the survival of human liberty. The world, therefore should not condone the perpetration of one of the greatest political crimes in human history.”

On July 18, 1966, the International Court of Justice rendered its Judgment in Ethiopia v. South Africa; Liberia v. South Africa:

“In its Judgment on the second phase of the cases the Court, by the President’s casting vote, the votes being equally divided (seven-seven), found that the Applicant States could not be considered to have established any legal right or interest in the subject matter of their claims and accordingly decided to reject them.”

Four months later, at the opening session of the OAU on November 6, 1966, His Imperial Majesty Haile Selassie stated:

“For a number of years now the problem of South West Africa has become the major concern of the African countries. Liberia and Ethiopia, as former members of the League of Nations, acting on behalf of all African States, had sued South Africa for violating her mandate in South-West Africa by introducing the policy of apartheid into that territory and by failing in her obligation to promote the interest of the African population. After six years of litigation, the International Court of Justice decided that the two states did not establish legal status in the case to stand before the Court, thus reversing its judgment of jurisdiction given in 1962. This unfortunate decision has profoundly shaken the high hopes that mankind had placed in the International Court of Justice. The faith man had that justice can be rendered is shattered and the cause of Africa betrayed.”

Apartheid laws of South Africa, by this time, had been extended to the country. The UN continued to debate the question, and in June 1971 the International Court of Justice ruled that the South African presence in South West Africa was illegal. However, South Africa continued to govern the territory. As a result, the South West African People’s Organization (SWAPO), a black African nationalist movement led by Sam Nujoma, escalated its guerrilla campaign to oust South Africans. South Africa continued to resist eviction until December 1988, when it agreed to allow “Namibia” to become independent.

Thus, one can see that the victory of Haile Selassie over Mussolini and the Fascists in 1941, and HIM Haile Selassie's "Coming to America" actually provoked the Brown vs. Board of Education decision. The case was significant not only in terms of American history, but in terms of the African Liberation struggle and, therefore, world history. Today, even African American scholars do an injustice by failing to link the Brown v Board of Education decision to the African Liberation struggle led by His Imperial Majesty Emperor Haile Selassie I. As a result, the public is taught that the Brown vs. Board of Education was only a significant element in the civil rights struggle instead of the human rights struggle which Malcolm X was illustrating back in 1964-65.

As EARLY As January 2012, The United States Of America's Executive Branch (via Their President Barack Obama), Legislative Branch (via U.S. Kentucky Senator Rand Paul) and United States Department Of Defense (via Joint Chiefs of Staff - Michael Mullen) Was SERVED With TERMINATION:

IMPORTANT TO NOTE:  It may seem comical; however, here it is NOW 2023 (at the time of this publishing) and the Chickasaw Tribal Nation's / Utica International Embassy's Officials, etc. are in a position to proceed before the appropriate / applicable INTERNATIONAL Authorities!  What were the issues presented and preserved for FIRING / TERMINATION:

IMPORTANT TO NOTE: 

The Chickasaw Tribal Nation
Is A LAWFULLY Recognized Nation and
Is NOT A Movement!