I can honestly say that when I had read articles by Steven Argue on behalf of Mumia that I was left with the impression that the author was a high school student on his first binge of radicalism.
However, after doing some quick research I discovered with a great amount of amusement that Mr. Argue is no spring chicken. He is, or was apparently a former leader of the socialist
California Peace and Freedom Party
. Apparently, the group was not radical enough for him and he is now apparently a self-anointed Jamal advocate.
In his most recent "article"
Mr. Argue contends, apparently with a straight face that:
"Congress voted 368 to 31 to back the racist frame-up of Mumia Abu Jamal by condemning the decision of the French city of St. Denis to name a street after the innocent death row inmate."
This stretch of logic employed by Mr. Argue is astonishing. If one were to believe his line of argument you would have to believe that not only is the Philly PD, DA, Mayor, media, etc...complicit with the "frame up" of Mumia, but so to is the vast majority of Congress. To Mr. Argue this is a conspiracy that would dwarf that of the JFK theories.
He goes on further to state that:
"Not a single Pennsylvania Congressperson voted against the racist resolution. Joining in the racist lynch mob calling for blood of an innocent black man..."(he goes on to list the "evil" and "racist" democrats who voted for the resolution"
The above is hyperbolic rhetoric at it's most guttural and cheap. Those who voted for this bill were voting for a resolution that spoke against the deification of a man by a who was convicted by a jury of murdering a civil servant. It is a symbolic statement that reflects the indignation that I can safely argue that most civilized human beings feel when a killer is cast as hero by ill-informed and politically motivated individuals.
The "Mumia street" bill was not a referendum on Jamal's guilt, innocence, or the fairness of the trial. And no amount of spin on the part of Mr. Argue can alter that reality. That he would so cheaply and crassly lower himself to this level of rhetoric shows in glaring fashion, either a disconnect from reality or that he himself is a victim of propagandizing.
Either way, he is full of it and if he wants to argue the point further than I fully encourage him to do so either on my site or on the new forum at the website dedicated to Officer Daniel Faulkner
Further digging the hole of a "democratic conspiracy" Steven Argue, not surprisingly screws up on some of his facts, something that the pro-Jamal forces are getting quite adept at. Either this is an indication of sloppy desperation or the intellectual vacuum left when the "movement" lost a good deal of it's followers in the post-Weinglass period is hard to say. But while Mr. Argue is entitled to his outlandish opinions, he is not similarly free to dispense his own brand of facts. About the Democratic Party and PA Governor Ed Rendell he had this to say:
"The Democrat Party was also involved in the frame-up of Mumia Abu-Jamal from the beginning. Democrat Ed Rendell was the Philadelphia district attorney that successfully worked to frame Mumia Abu-Jamal in 1982. Later, with a lynch mob attitude created by the lies of the corporate press, he successfully ran for mayor of Philadelphia on a platform that included promoting the murder of Mumia Abu-Jamal. He was Mayor from 1992-1999. Bill Clinton then helped get him the position of chair of the National Democratic Committee. Since 2003 he has been the Governor of Pennsylvania. In addition Ed Rendell is a member of the Fraternal Order of Police that is calling for Mumia’s blood while his wife is an appellate judge on the Third Circuit US Court of Appeals that is going to hear Mumia's appeal. Besides framing Mumia, Rendell also presided over the police bombing of the MOVE home in Philadelphia in 1984, resulting in 11 deaths and 65 homes destroyed."
Ed Rendell was DA during Jamal's prosecution, but unless he personally un-holstered Jamal's gun and held Jamal's hand as he fired it into Officer Faulkner's back than I think his role as a member of the ever growing "Mumia frame-up squad" is unlikely.
As for Ed Rendell running a media fueled, fry-Mumia lynch mob campaign for Mayor, that is complete nonsense. Jamal was not a blip on the political radar screen in 1991 or 1992 when Rendell became Mayor. And as Mayor, he had real power to influence whether or not Jamal was executed or not. Moreover, at that time, Jamal had a mountain of appeals left to him, so execution was not so much an issue in the courts, not to speak of in a mayoral election. Also, a twenty second phone call to the State of Pennsylvania FOP Headquarters would have informed Steven Argue that Governer Rendell is not a member of the FOP.
Ed Rendell did not "preside" over the MOVE "bombing". His role in the matter as district attorney was minor to say the least. It was MOVE members who initiated the "confrontation", refused to send out the children, refused to be served with valid warrants, and who chose to open fire on the police. If anyone "presided" over the terrible events of that day it was John Africa.
Mr. Argue is simply full of it.
Whatever evidence he has to show that Ed Rendell "framed" Jamal I would love to see. Perhaps better than offering up silly conspiracy theories, Mr. Argue can explain to me how it was that Mumia came to be doing at 3 in the morning slumped over with Daniel Faulkner's bullet in his chest, Jamal's own weapon a few feet away from Jamal and his empty holster of a gun of which all rounds were fired?
How is it that four strangers would come to indicate that Jamal was the shooter? His gun linked to the crime?
All a frame up? Give me a break.
In the standard conclusion of all good Jamal devotees, Argue makes the case as Jamal as the voice of the quintessential underdogs of the world.
Mumia stands up for unions, against war, against racism, equality for gays and lesbians, for the poor, and against the many injustices of the so-called criminal justice system. Mumia speaks up on many of the issues ignored, lied about, or glossed over by the corporate media and the corporate politicians. We need Mumia, yes we need him alive, but we also need him free. Yet all of the evidence shows that Mumia won't get justice in America unless we turn up the heat.
Yes, Mumia is quite the benevolent citizen. Too bad he decided to throw it all away when he ran up and shot another human being in the back and than worked very hard to shoot this same man in the face. Such a thing can kind of diminish one's public persona, but never in the eyes of an ideologue like Argue.
Mumia is for the unions? The FOP is a union. They don't seem to be to interested in his support, nor do any of the other unions in Philadelphia who know the facts and know that Mumia is a con-artist and a murderer. Is Jamal against war? Arguably that is the case, but he is very much pro-despot. If one followed the advice of Jamal than Milosevic would have completed his genocide as would have Saddam Hussein. The Taliban would be running Afghanistan and the world would be hardly better for it.
Mumia is a friend of war-criminals and not the "voice of the voiceless".
Is Mumia for "equality for gays and lesbians"? Perhaps when it is politically convenient. Jamal adheres to the "teachings of John Africa" which are not only anti-gay, but also anti-choice, and pro-child rape.
No, we don't need Mumia. Mumia needs to be right where he has been for the last quarter of a century. Nobody needs his generic political posturing, plagiarized emotions, retrograde ideology, or dogmatic adherence to MOVE guru, John Africa. Mumia is "not one of us". He is not a "freedom fighter". He is no "hero". He is an opportunistic killer who feeds off of a toxic mix of cynicism and ignorance.