Tuesday, June 19, 2007

Georgia Governor Suspected Of Having Ties to 1946 Lynching

The Associated Press obtained the full case file only last week after a 2-year effort to get the information on this case through the Freedom of Information Act.

Newly released files from the lynching of two black couples more than 60 years ago contain a disturbing revelation: The FBI investigated suspicions that a three-term governor of Georgia sanctioned the murders to sway rural white voters during a tough election campaign.

According to this story, Governor Eugene Talmadge's re-election campaign had a violently racist tone back in 1946 and after a fight between a black sharecropper and a white farmer where the white farmer was injured, the governor allegedly offered immunity to anyone who took care of that negro.

On July 25, 1946, a white farmer posted the sharecropper's bail and took this man, his wife and another black couple in his car and was driving them as they were ambushed. All 4 passengers, Roger and Dorothy Malcom, and George and Mae Murray Dorsey, were tied to trees and then murdered in three volleys. One of the women shot to death was 7 months pregnant. The white man driving the car wasn't shot even once and claimed he didn't recognize even a single person in that mob.

Even if all of the unproven suspicions by FBI agents weren't true, the undisputed details of this case highlights why so many African Americans don't trust that law enforcement officials will be a source of justice.

Yet lately it is those who salivate over the idea of killing Mike Nifong and the alleged victim in that case who claim to be the victims now that being a white person accused of committing violence against a black person may actually result in criminal charges.

How unfair life has gotten for them since 1946.

No wonder these people say "Duke 88" as if these people are notorious criminals who must be destroyed rather than referring to them as Duke professors who used their free speech rights to publicly acknowledge that the fear of violence and the fear of injustice is real and needs to be addressed.

I came across a "Christian" forum where one man disgusted over this case wrote: "Just remember, we're the ones who own American industry, the economy and plenty of weapons."

Personally, I view this man and the many others like him as a far greater public threat than the "Duke 88."


Bookmark and Share
posted by Marcella Chester @ 12:04 AM   4 comments links to this post


At June 19, 2007 12:41 AM, Blogger trvolk said...

Not too hard to believe since Talmadge was a Southern Democrat (not to be confused with contemporary Democrats, of course).

At June 19, 2007 7:27 AM, Blogger wayne fontes said...

Freedom of speech doesn't include a right not to be criticized. When a member of the G88 opined that (Thavolia Glynph) "the case is going back words" when the DNA results came back negative they are wide open for criticism. Hoping that a woman was raped to advance a political agenda is about as low as it gets. Grant Farred's assertion that the Duke defendants perjured themselves was a lie. Does he deserve a pass for that?

At June 19, 2007 8:40 AM, Blogger Marcella Chester said...

Wayne, no freedom of speech doesn't include the right not to be criticized but when people say that the G88 convicted the lacrosse players they are lying and they know it.

I notice that you don't criticize those who specifically and overtly wish death upon the alleged victim but criticize those who in your words -- not theirs -- wish the victim had been raped.

Your characterizing of those who stand up for alleged rape victims' rights to be "innocent until proven guilty" as people who wish that person were raped is pure bullshit. It shows that you will go lower than those you criticize.

Grant Farred's assertion is his belief and when someone believes what they are saying it isn't a lie. I'm sure you believe many things that are flat out wrong, but that doesn't mean you have perjured yourself. If you think it does then you need to read the definition of perjury.

I notice that you also completely ignore the injustices that made this case such a hot issue. Pretending they never happened only makes you look like someone whose agenda in this case has nothing to do with justice for those who aren't white or male.

At June 19, 2007 9:55 AM, Blogger Seeing Eye Chick said...

There is nothing scaryier than a religious fanatic with guns. Making comments like the one quoted in this blog just go to show us that these people are willing to pursue revenge when things dont go their way.

What? The courts didnt rule they way you think they ought to? Well PRaise the Lord and pass the ammo boys, lets get a posse together

Lets conspire to avoid hiring nonwhites, nomales, nonChristians.

Dont lease to them either.

If they run for office, show up in masse and force them to a socially scripted religious test, even though no such test is to be given in this country to qualify one for public office.

Start a smear campaign, a whisper campaign using fax machines and copy machines, e-mails and AM Talk Radio.

When these jerks make statements that they are Proud Americans, Not like them Dang "Taliban fighters, etc.," Its code for, "We are too stupid to know we are JUST like them people we claim to hate.

Religious Fanatics

As someone who knows what responsible care and conduct is with fire arms, I will also add that I am deeply disturbed by this veiled threat to other portions of our entire AMERICAN population.

Having a right to bear arms, and to keep state militias is not an excuse for some nutjobs out there to get together and ride the countryside like Quantril's Raiders.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home