Eldridge Cleaver told David Mills the same things about black-on-white rape that I said in my article

David Horowitz in May 2006 told David Mills that my statements about blacks were “racist and offensive” and that he would therefore not publish me any more at FrontPage Magazine, even though Horowitz himself, without my knowledge and without paying me, had published at his Discover the Network website my main article containing those “racist and offensive” statements. My “racist and offensive” article is still posted at Horowitz’s website at this moment.

Now it turns out that David Mills, who has repeatedly portrayed me as some race-obsessed sicko for writing that black rapists target white women, conducted an interview with Eldridge Cleaver in 1982, published at Mills’s website, in which Cleaver discussed his career of raping white women and said that there was a lot of denial of the reality of black-on-white rape:

MILLS: When you came out after that first term, you spent about a year on the outside before your second conviction. And during that time, as you revealed in “Soul on Ice,” you set about raping white women as a principle of black rebellion.

CLEAVER: I wrote this in prison. And I wrote this because I was trying to describe my own feelings, my own attitudes, and the attitudes of a lot of black men. At that time, this was something that was not really written about, talked about. It was kind of scandalous. There was a lot of denial in blacks who had these feelings.

MILLS: What feelings? Sexual attraction to white women?

CLEAVER: People used to deny that. The whole phenomenon was raging at that time because this whole black consciousness thing was coming in, interracial relationships were rising.

One of the old bugaboos of race relations in America has been black rape. It has been a big problem down through history and continues to be a problem. For my own part, I think there is often a lot of denial in that. But I think the facts will support a case that there is quite a bit of black rape.

There are three things established from the above interview and from the Cleaver quote in the previous blog entry:

  • Cleaver raped white women in order to defile them and thus get revenge on the white race.

  • Cleaver raped white women because he was attracted to them, and he says that other black rapists of white women have the same motive, and that there is a lot of denial about this.

  • Cleaver says that because of the attraction of black men to white women, “there is quite a bit of black rape [of white women],” though “there is often a lot of denial” about that as well.

Further, David Mills did not disagree with Cleaver’s assertions of the prevalence of black-on-white rape and of black men’s attraction to white women. Nor did Mills take Cleaver to task or call Cleaver a “self-hating black” for saying such racist things about blacks. Mills accepted Cleaver’s statements then without demur, and he publishes them today at his website without demur.

Why, then, has Mills been waging war on me over my article at FrontPage Magazine on interracial rape? The only flaw in that article was the misleading figure from the Department of Justice table (correctly reported by me) which put the amount of “white”-on-black rape in 2005 at close to zero. The main points of my article were (1) the huge amount of black-on-white rape in this country, (2) my comment that the statistics suggest that black rapists “target” white women, and (3) my statement that the facts of black-on-white rape are denied and covered up in America. But Mills himself uncritically accepted all three of those assertions when he heard them from a venerable Lion of the Left in 1982.

- end of initial entry -

Stephen F. writes:

This revelation of the motives of black rapists, coming from Mills’s site itself, is beautiful, in a train-wreck sort of way. Mills has stirred up forces beyond his control. The whole episode is going to lead to greater consciousness about black-on-white rape.

The Cleaver interview is fascinating in that it reveals how utterly radical and anti-American, anti-white, anti-civilization the ’60s movements were, right from the start—black Muslims, Chicanos, you name it. Though many whites, like Reagan, saw this at the time, white society as a whole has decided to suppress the truth.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at May 16, 2007 06:20 AM | Send

Email entry

Email this entry to:

Your email address:

Message (optional):