Constitutional Committee Hears Complaints on the Black Farmers’ Lawsuit

by Dr. Ridgely Abdul Mu’min Muhammad

On November 18, 2004 the House Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution
received testimony concerning Pigford v. Glickman. This hearing focused on the adequacy of
the Notice Provision in the Pigford v. Glickman Consent Decree.

The Chairman of the subcommittee, Representative Steve Chabot, started out by stating that as the
committee examined certain aspects of the Consent Decree, "…it has become increasingly
apparent that certain Due Process protections, fundamental to the Constitution, are lacking in this
case."

Rep. Chabot goes on to point out that recent statistics released on the Consent Decree suggest
that the "fundamental right to notice" was not safeguarded in its construction and
administration. Although the notice campaign design was deemed to be "effective" by the
court, reports indicate that approximately 66,000 potential class members submitted their claim
late, losing their right to sue the USDA for past wrongs.

Written testimonies from a number of individuals and Black farm organizations were received by
the committee and oral testimony was given by others. Mrs. Bernice Atchison led a delegation from
Chilton County Alabama where no farmer had heard how to get into the Consent Decree until past the
deadline. She pointed out that there was no notice posted at the USDA or extension office or in
their local newspaper. No announcements were made on the local radio stations nor given to local
Black churches.

Mrs. Atchinson pointed out the failure of the USDA to post the original decree, deadlines and
extensions was in direct violation of Judge Friedman’s order that the agency do so. Mr. Gary R.
Grant, President of BFAA, in an interview after the proceedings pointed out that it was naive or
unrealistic to expect the USDA to comply with such demands, when it was the source of past
discrimination and no provisions were made to enforce compliance by threats of disciplinary action
against offending employees.

During the question and answer period, Rep. Bacchus from Alabama got Ms. Jeanne C. Finegan,
representing Poorman- Douglas Corporation which was responsible for getting out the notice to the
famers, to admit that they received only $385,000 and 180 days to reach potential class
participants. Rep. Bacchus pointed out that he has a budget of $1 million for outreach just for his
congressional district which was still inadequate, therefore it seemed that the intent to fulfill
the letter of the Consent Decree was not manifested by the placement of sufficient resources or
time.

The bottom line to this hearing was the recognition that many of the late applicants were
deprived of their constitutional right of "due process" and that a legislative remedy
should be produced to address such shortcomings. The suggestion was put forth that all of the 66,000
late claimants should be admitted to the class and their cases properly adjudicated under the
guidelines and procedures of the Consent Decree as written.

Of course admitting more members into the class will not help the 39% of the present class
members who were denied, nor will it address basic problems of the Consent Decree that were
presented at the Fairness Hearing in March of 1999. The problems were not addressed in the final
document signed by Judge Friedman and have proven to operate against the Black farmers in the exact
manner that they prophesied.

Although only four witnesses were allowed to give oral testimony at the hearing on November 18th,
a number of other written testimonies were submitted which point out some of the shortcomings of the
Consent Decree. For instance Mr. Obei L. Beal, a farmer and a class member, pointed out that it
appears "…the managers committed unlawful acts" while being trusted by Congress to
rightly: 1. Construct, 2. Get Approved, 3. Enforce, the Consent Decree. Mr. Beal pointed out that by
using the word "Claimant" instead of "Farmer" to file claims allowed "any
person" to file a claim in the law suit which resulted in approximately 90,000 claims to filed
while USDA records would show that there were only about 15,000 Black farmers. This watering down of
the Black farmers’ claims mixed in with the many non-farmers allowed the government to pay
"claimants" while ignoring many legitimate Black farmers and thereby denying them justice
while hiding the fact.

BFAA president, Mr. Gary R. Grant, presented the committee with a list of problems on behalf of
BFAA and its members with the enactment of the Consent Degree:

1. Black farmer who are labeled as owing the USDA money are disproportionately more likely to
have their claims of discrimination denied by the arbitrator or adjudicator, and this practice
appears to be a concerted effort to prevent the "actual or real farmers" from remaining in
agriculture.

2. The Black farmers who have not received debt relief, are again besieged by their properties
being at risk to foreclosure by the USDA.

3. Black farmers’ claims have been denied based on the loophole of finding a "similarly
situated white farmer", a stipulation unanimously objected to by the farmers and their
representatives at the March 4, 1999 "Fairness Hearing".

4. We object to the unusual requirement in the Pigford Consent Decree that as a part of a class
action lawsuit, Black farmers must re-prove discrimination on an individual basis. This requirement
is most unjustifiable considering that it was not required in the case of Japanese Americans and the
victims of the Jewish Holocaust.

5. We are disappointed that even the Black farmers who did prevail in the Pigford case have not
been given preferential treatment in the USDA loans programs since 1999 as stipulated by the Consent
Decree.

6. We feel that the final major tactic of the USDA’s lawyers and this consent decree is to use
tax payer money to prolong the struggle for justice for Black farmers until the farmers die off,
especially since statistics show that in 1997 over 25% of Black farmers were over 70 years of age.

Attorney Stephon Bowens pointed out after the hearing that other fundamental constitutional
issues concerning this Consent Decree must be brought forward at subsequent hearings. One such
hearing is scheduled for late January of 2005 to be held in Cincinnati, Ohio. All Black farmers are
encouraged to attend those hearings and express their grievances with hope for some type of relief
developed by the new Congress.

by Dr. Ridgely Abdul Mu’min Muhammad

"This is a hoax. This is a hoax", warned Senator Byrd from West Virginia in debates
over the Homeland Security Bill of 2002. The Senate was given a 484 page document and was required
to vote on it in 48 hours without committee scrutiny or public hearings. Why? What is President
"Pharaoh" Bush trying to sneak over on the American people?

At the very last minute a few amendments were added. One in particular we find very interesting.
The Associated Press released a story on November 18th entitled "Showdown
Could Impact Homeland Security Bill". In that article it was stated that "A provision
of the bill also would protect pharmaceutical companies from lawsuits over vaccines they create and
their side effects." Why?

We have also heard that this country is planning for mass inoculations of its citizens against
possible "terrorist attacks" using bio-weapons such as anthrax and small pox. We also know
that the anthrax sent to Democrat Tom Daschel was from a strand stored by the US military at Fort
Detrick. There are also some that believe that HIV in Africa was spread through contaminated small
pox vaccines. We also know that they are now experimenting with growing vaccines in bio-engineered
corn.

In the week before this bill was passed another seemingly unrelated story broke about genetically
engineered corn. But first, let’s go back to a CBS news story from October 8, 2002 entitled
"In Coming Harvests, Farm-aceutical Corn". According to this report:

"This year the USDA has issued 32 field permits for the growing of drugs and drug compounds
in barley, rice, tobacco and corn.

And the list of what is being grown is revolutionary: plant-based insulin and vaccines for
hepatitis B, cholera and diarrhea. There have even been greenhouse attempts to grow spermicide.

Next year, the biotech firm Epicyte will be the first to start human clinical tests on a gel to
treat herpes. That drug too, is being grown in corn.

Tony Laos, the CEO of Prodigene, a biotech company in business to grow drugs in crops, believes
the process will eventually reduce the retail cost of drugs…

Laos says he’s sure drugs won’t contaminate the non-pharmaceutical corn, ‘because I’m following
procedures that makes it impossible for that to happen.""

Now let’s look at a story that broke just one month later, November 15, 2002, and see how long
it takes the "impossible" to happen. According to this Just-Food.com article, USA:
Contamination incidents fuel GM debate, "On Wednesday this week, the US Department of
Agriculture (USDA) quarantined 500,000 bushels of soybeans in Nebraska on concerns that a small
amount of ProdiGene bio-corn may have been mixed with the soybean harvest."

So it took about one month for Mr. Laos’ assurance that the "impossible" could not
happen. Interestingly, a week later after the "impossible" happened the Homeland Security
Bill was passed that would protect companies like ProdiGene and Epicyte from any liabilities with
experimenting and producing vaccines in corn, even though these genes may cross over into the
general food supply. Add to this that Epicyte is "experimenting" with "spermicides"
produced in corn, then what we have here is a formula for mass sterilization and you won’t be able
to sue for damages.

Now let’s go further back to the so-called "father of history", Herodotus, to get an
historical perspective on these modern events. Has this happened before? Herodotus points out a
strange nation of people north of the Caucasus Mountains called the "Scythians" who lived
some 3,000 years ago. They were both hated and feared in the civilized world at that time because of
their economic philosophy, cyclical plundering of their neighbors, and their military philosophy,
running while poisoning the land and water behind them.

Enron, Worldcom, the year 2000 California energy crisis and the recent stock market losses by the
masses are examples of their economic plundering philosophy in a modern context. Genetic
engineering, plant-based spermicides and food crop cross-contamination are the modern tools of their
kill, run and poison military philosophy. Add this to their immunity from prosecution or liability,
then you get the best of all evil worlds, the 2002 Homeland Security Bill.

You may ask, if they poison America, then where will white folks go? Answer: back to the
"caves and hillsides" of Europe. Have you noticed that Europe and not Florida has become
the prime retirement location for the rich and famous of America? Do you know how many so-called
white people have dual citizenship in both America and Europe? Do you know that Europe refuses to
accept America’s genetically engineered food crops?

The Black farmers are stilled walking in a daze trying to understand why America does not want
them to farm. Answer: As in the time of "Pharaoh" you Black folks "don’t die, you
multiply". And America does not want you Black folks growing food because you might not want to
grow the poisons that America has in mind for your people. This is why Al Pires from the Justice
Department was sent in to prevent the Black farmers from going to trial. This government did not
want to expose their duplicity and conspiracy against the Black farmers and American people. It was
the USDA that took the Black farmers’ land and it was the USDA that funded research and actually
produced these genetically engineered bio-weapons of "mass destruction". All of this being
done with the tax payers’ money.

Should we blame the Republicans or Democrats? One with a gun in your face, while the other holds
a gun at your back. This is a continuation of the "white man’s fear of a Black planet"
as documented by Democrats, Cyrus Vances’ 1980 "Global 2000 Report to the President",
and Al Gore’s "Earth in the balance". "Global 2000" suggested that the world
was quickly becoming overpopulated. Al Gore suggested in his book that the rapid growth in human
population was leading to environmental degradation and that the world should institute a
"Global Marshall Plan". The first tenant of such a plan would be "Stabilizing World
Population". Mr. Gore, the former Vice-president, demonstrates his points by focusing in on
three countries as examples of overpopulation; Kenya, Egypt and Nigeria. These are the only
countries that he mentions and they all are interestingly on the continent of Africa.

The "Scythians" ride again.

by Dr. Ridgely Abdul Mu’min Muhammad

Sometimes "too little, too late" is worse than nothing at all. In farming there are
optimal times to do specific operations to insure a profitable crop. A good farmer knows what he
must do at certain times and plans to have the necessary resources in place to act on time. If he
has not been able to act on time for that particular crop, then he must make a decision to continue
spending time and money on a failing crop or save his resources for another season. The farmer must
also thoroughly analyze the reasons for this season’s failures and adjust his strategy for the
upcoming season.

In an article called "The Achilles’ Heel of the Reparations Lawsuits" Henry Mark Holzer
points out four legal flaws in current reparations lawsuits: 1. There are no legitimate plaintiffs,
i.e. the reparations lawsuits have been brought by people who were not slaves, and thus have no
grievances; 2. There is no recognizable legal claim, i.e. slavery was legal; 3. There are no
legitimate defendants, i.e. plaintiffs can not trace a causal connection of present damages to
specific defendants; and 4. There are no provable damages.

However, the Black Farmers claims were legitimate and quantifiable: The government caused them to
lose land, money and equipment which could be documented. The farmers could also document the
government’s negligence by its dismantling the office of Civil Rights in the USDA which had the
responsibility of insuring their rights. They had clear grievances, identifiable plaintiffs and sued
the entity clearly responsible, i.e. the USDA.

All class action lawsuits filed by Black lawyers including those filed in 1990 and 1997 were
thrown out of federal court until a white "do gooder" lawyer named Alexander Pires showed
up in 1998. By the end of 1998 Mr. Pires had accepted a consent decree on behalf of the Black
farmers as a settlement in the Pigford v. Glickman lawsuit against the USDA. The Black farmers
protested the "details" of the consent decree in federal court to Judge Friedman in March
of 1999 which they knew would lead to the dismal outcome that they now face. The farmers went back
to federal court in July of 2000 to ask Judge Friedman to throw it out and start over again. Most of
the motions to help the farmers were thrown out by Judge Friedman, while many motions that allowed
the government to stall the process and get out of paying farmers and removing their debt to the
USDA were allowed.

It is now November of 2003 and the consent decree was scheduled to end April 14, 2004 and yet the
farmers are still suffering and still protesting. Only 60% of the applicants prevailed and most of
those who did prevail were either non-farmers or farmers with no intention of going back into
farming. Even the monies that were dispersed were spread out over a number of years so that the
farmers could not put their resources together to move forward collectively.

The united front that Judge Friedman admitted was the force that pushed the government into the
consent decree has been broken. Now each group blames the other for not doing enough to make the
government (the enemy of each group) abide by its own piece of paper (consent decree). And now as
the great American engine of prosperity is wearing down, it seems that she will attempt to leave her
once slaves in a squabble over yet another attempt of receiving reparations from a heartless
bankrupt "turnip" (the US government).

Past efforts to get reparations from this government were given a historical perspective by Dr.
Conrad W. Worrill in his 2003 article "A REPARATIONS HISTORICAL OVERVIEW." In this article
Dr. Worrill points out that the movement for reparations goes back to the leadership of Sister
Callie House who founded The National Ex-Slave Mutual Relief Bounty and Pension Association in the
1890s. According to historian Mary Frances Berry, Sister House organized a Black Mass Movement
demanding reparations from the 1890s to 1915. However, "After finding no evidence of federal
violations, U. S. officials indicted Ms. House and a number of other members, at Nashville for
fraud, for using the mail to distribute one of the Association’s carefully drawn leaflets. She was
found guilty and sentenced to a year and a day in the federal prison at Jefferson City."

Although this phase of the Reparations Movement was not successful, the spirit and organizing
work carried on through the Garvey Movement and continued with Robert Brock, who filed a suit in
1965 to stop the statute of limitations as it relates to slavery reparations. Queen Mother Moore
championed reparations for over sixty years. She is considered the High Priestess of the Reparations
Movement and formed the Reparations Committee of Descendants of United States Slaves, Inc., along
with Dara Abubakari. In 1962, they delivered a petition to the United Nations demanding the United
States be made to pay reparations.

Contributions to the Reparations Movement resurfaced through the leadership of the Honorable
Elijah Muhammad and Malcolm X in the 1960s, making the demand for reparations through Muhammad
Speaks, the print voice of the Nation of Islam. The Republic of New Africa made a reparations demand
in 1968, demanding payment of $400 billion in damages for slavery.

Dr. Worril goes on to write that the National Coalition Of Blacks for Reparations in America (N`COBRA)
was organized in 1988 following in the tradition of Callie House. Beginning in 1989, Congressman
John Conyers introduced legislation in each Congress calling for the U. S. government to study the
impact of slavery on Africans in the United States.

Since the late 1980s, several organizations including the December 12th Movement, the Uhuru
Movement, The Lost and Found Nation of Islam, the Republic of New Africa (RNA), and the National
Black United Front (NBUF) continue to organize around the demand for reparations. The Tulsa Race
Riot Commission, under the leadership of Representative Donn Ross has generated more interest in the
movement. Since the late 1990s, Attorney Deadria Farmer-Paellmann’s research on the insurance
companies that held policies on enslaved Blacks in the 1850s has led to a Corporate Reparations
Lawsuit.

The reparations movement has now entered a very serious stage of its development. White "do
gooder" lawyers such as Alexander Pires, the lead attorney in the Pigford v. Glickman lawsuit,
and others are developing reparations lawsuits to present to the court. Based on past experience it
is very likely that the "white" brand of "paper" will be accepted by the court
leading Black people down the same trail of tears that Pires led the Black farmers through.

We are not saying that Reparations is not justified. However, the form of such reparations,
including the methods to insure that the "instrument" chosen will produce the desired
results of repairing the victims, must be carefully analyzed in light of the continuing saga of the
Black farmers. In fact the continuing recalcitrance of the United States government to correct an
obvious, recent and correctable wrong should prove to all concerned that the issue of reparations
for wrongs done over 150 years ago leading up to today is not being forced upon the innocent white
victims of today. White people and their governments are still in the unrepentant practice of
stealing resources, legislating unfair advantage, denying their own guilt and denying justice to
their victims. Reparations movement leaders must beware of the "Snake in the Reparations’
Grass" that continues to bite the Black farmers.

by Dr. Ridgely Abdul Mu’min Muhammad

On November 12, 2005 Dr. Ridgely A. Mu’min Muhammad announced that Muhammad Farms would name
its planned agricultural training building and dormitory the "William Muhammad Agriculture
Building". On Tuesday, November 15, 2005 our beloved brother and pioneer, Bro. William
Muhammad, departed from us at the age of 104. We had hoped to have raised the money to put up the
building before he had passed so that he could see that his work and name would not be forgotten by
those who benefited from his expertise and sacrifice.

Bro. William was one of the few Black farmers that we still have. We now must develop a new breed
of farmers and agricultural professionals, if Black people intend to be ready to "do for self
or die a slave" as the victims of hurricane Katrina learned. The government of the United
States showed the world that it either does not care or can not help those who can not help
themselves. Young Black people have called us or emailed us at Muhammad Farms wanting to know how
they could become farmers. Unfortunately, I had to tell them that I did not know of any university
that actually taught how to farm. The agricultural programs at the universities, both Black and
white, train students for careers in the agribusiness industry but not how to run a farm. In many
cases an agricultural student may go through four years of training and never set foot on a real
farm.

Farming requires a set of skills that one can only obtain through a combination of field
experience and classroom training. Skilled farmers attend many seminars sponsored by their local
agricultural extension service to keep up with the latest production techniques and advances. They
obtain and pass on to their sons, daughters and other farm workers their most important skills by
hands-on experience.

However, the policies and practices of the USDA has destroyed the desire for farming as a
vocation in the children of Black farmers. The Pigford v. Glickman class action lawsuit may have
been the final nail in the coffin of Black farmers. The Black farmers’ children are astute enough
to know that as an individual it would be committing economic suicide to take over and run their
parents’ farms. To combat this, the Nation of Islam’s Ministry of Agriculture has advanced the
idea of a system of agriculture where control is maintained "from the land to the man" and
we are involved in all phases of food production, processing and distribution.

I came down to Georgia in February of 1995 as the farm manager. I came with undergraduate and
graduate training and degrees in agricultural economics. However, I had enough sense to know that I
needed the advice of an experienced farmer from this area of the country to be my farm production
adviser. Allah (God) had preserved such a one in the person of Bro. William Muhammad.

Bro. William was 93 years old when I met him. He had been the advisor for this same farm in
Georgia in the 1960s and ‘70s under the leadership of the Honorable Elijah Muhammad. At that time
the farm was not 1600 acres but 4500 acres.

When I got here in Georgia, Bro. William taught me about the soils, the climate, what types of
crops grew well down here, the time to plant, how deep to plant the seeds, where to get the best
seeds, where to find the right equipment, how to fight the weeds and insects, how to fix old used
equipment, what business people to deal with and which to stay away from. In other words he taught
me what I could never get in a classroom and therefore could never teach to students in my courses
that I taught at North Carolina A&T State University. He not only taught me, but he had the
strength and vigor to demonstrate what he taught although he was in his 90s.

As I stated earlier, Bro. William was here on this same farm 30 years before I got to Georgia.
The Honorable Elijah Muhammad put him on post and Allah (God) left him in a position to guard this
farm even after the farm was sold on the departure of the Messenger. He told me how painful it was
to see this farm sold off. He could have gone back to Detroit, but decided to stay here in the hopes
that one day we would get this farm back. Imagine waiting, hoping and praying some 20 years for a
miracle of sorts.

In 1991 The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan put the same plan in action that was set up by the
Messenger in 1963 called the "Three Year Economic Savings Program". He told me that he was
just following in the footsteps of the Honorable Elijah Muhammad and was redeeming the properties
and putting back in place the programs of his teacher. Therefore, Bro. William Muhammad was brought
out of storage to teach a new breed of farmers and we learned a lot from our brother.

Now we must set up a training facility in his name on Muhammad Farms, so that we can train that
next breed of Black farmers. We need classrooms to teach them and dormitory rooms for them to spend
some time on the farm working the land. We have had a number of young people and groups to visit
Muhammad Farms for a day at a time. The young people were completely in awe over the size of the
farm operation and the work and skills necessary to run this size of farm. Many of them were
inspired to go back home and do further research as well as set up small gardens. Many of these same
students have come year after year. Now we need a place for them to stay.

Eventually we will have a full agricultural university and training center at Muhammad Farms. The
William Muhammad Agricultural Building will be the first facility established for this new growth of
a needed and continuing institution for our people. We in the Nation of Islam understand that the
man and woman are recognized by their works and remembered because of those works. One can live in
the future based on the quality and effect of our work in the present. Bro. William Muhammad has
done such great works that must be preserved and passed on to our new and never to die Nation of
Islam.

Bro. William Muhammad will be remembered long after his funeral which will be held at 1:00 pm on
Saturday, November 19, 2005 at the Albritten Funeral Home, 395 Cedar Hill Ave, Dawson, Ga.

Peace, Doc

by Dr. Ridgely Abdul Mu’min Muhammad

"Why is it that the only people who got paid in this lawsuit are the white monitor, the
white lead counsel, the white judge, the white arbitrators; the black lawyers didn’t get paid and
the black farmers didn’t get paid?"

We raised this question to Attorney Randi Roth, the Pigford v. Glickman lawsuit monitor, at the
Congressional Black Caucus issues forum in September of this year. This question sparked a verbal
"tit for tat" between myself and Al Pires, the lead counsel for Pigford v. Glickman
lawsuit. The specifics of our argument were detailed in "Doc Confronts Al Pires" on the
"The Farmers Newsletter" at www.MuhammadFarms.com.

Since that time we have found out these facts. According to the court record Al Pires, lead
counsel, has received at least $14.9 million. Mr. Gary Grant, the president of BFAA, said that the
USDA admits to spending $60 million to fight the case trying to deny Black farmers their
settlements.

We recently questioned lawyers from the monitors office at a "Strategies for Success"
conference at Ft. Valley State University on November 6, 2002. Stephen Carpenter, Senior Counsel for
the monitor’s office, said that they have been paid about $15 million thus far. When a farmer is
denied in the lawsuit, he can appeal to the monitor’s office. However, all the monitor can do is
to recommend that the adjudicator review the decision made. The monitor can not reverse any
decisions by the adjudicators or arbitrators. We asked Mr. Carpenter how much did the adjudicators
and arbitrators make from this case. He said that how much they were paid was "private
information".

Now the lead counsel is "white", the monitor is "white", most of the
arbitrators and adjudicators are "white" and the facilitator, Poorman-Douglas, is white.
Mr. Pires said that most of the law firms that worked under him were Black and got most of the
money. I let Attorney Rose Sanders, whose law firm Chestnut, Sanders, Sanders and Pettaway, Campbell
& Albright P.C., out of Selma, Al., listen to the tape of the public confrontation between Al
Pires and myself. She said that Al Pires was lying about the money. Her law firm received only
fractions of the money for each case. Al Pires received all of the money for each case. He then
parceled out most of the cases to subordinate law firms, but reimbursed to them only a fraction of
what it cost them to litigate the cases leaving her firm in the red.

So what about the Black farmers, did they get paid? The latest statistics regarding Pigford v.
Glickman (now Veneman) in the Track A implementation as of November 4, 2002 show that of the total
21,549 "eligible" class members 12,927 or 60% have been approved with cash settlement and
debt relief amounting to $792,766,834. This is far below what the media has been putting out as a
$2.5 billion settlement.

We asked the monitor’s office how many farmers’ appeals were they sending back to the
adjudicators. Attorney Carpenter said about 60% would be sent back for review and 40% denied. This
60% approval rate seems to be a magic number in this case which reminds one of the 3/5ths or 60%
clause in the US Constitution.

But let us get back to the money. Each farmer who "won" under Class A was to receive
$50,000 in cash, a $12,500 credit with the IRS to pay the taxes on the $50,000 and debt relief. Mr.
Carpenter told the audience of Black farmers that unfortunately there was miscommunication between
the USDA and IRS. The IRS did not accept the $12,500 as payment on the taxes, but considered that
income. The farmers were not informed and therefore did not declare this $12,500 as income nor did
they pay the taxes on the $50,000 because they thought that the government had done so. Therefore,
these farmers were penalized for not reporting income and not paying taxes on income received.

In addition the $50,000 plus $12,500 plus any debt relief was added to the current year income
figure for the farmers placing many in the highest income bracket but with no cash to pay the taxes.
For instance if a farmer owed the USDA $100,000 which was forgiven, then he would have to pay taxes
on $100,000 plus $50,000 plus $12,500 or $162,500. If he was in the 40% tax bracket then he would
owe $65,000 causing him to cough up an additional $2,500 of his own money even though he
"won". 

We must add that in many cases the debt owed to the USDA was the accumulation of interest on debt
that the farmers had contested, which is why they went to court in the first place.  Therefore
if the farmer "won" in the lawsuit, he was forced to pay taxes on interest on what was
determined to be an illegal debt anyway.

However, if you read such stories as "Who Wants to be a Black Millionaire?: The untold story
of how USDA is handing out billions because of ‘racism’" at http://www.amren.com/whowants.htm,
you would think that the Black farmers got rich. This article brought out some interesting
"facts" about the lawsuit that we were not able to get directly but suspected. For
instance this February 2001 article stated, "It is highly significant that of the 11,932
claimants who had won so far, there were actual records of USDA loans for only 1,140 or 9.5 percent
of them. This means only a tiny minority of successful claimants had some kind of documented
borrowing relationship with USDA."

If this statement is true, and we believe that it is, it proves what the farmers have been saying
all along. The real Black farmers who suffered under discrimination from the USDA loan programs did
not get paid. Some Black people got paid, but they were not farmers. Instead most of the 3,000
farmers whose property was under the threat of foreclosure in 1997 were denied in this case and now
face foreclosure again with no legal right to fight, because they signed on to this consent decree.
And most of the real farmers who got paid did not owe a debt to the USDA. In other words this whole
process was a big government scam and cover up. 

Don’t forget that Al Pires did not allow the farmers to read the consent decree until he had sent
it to the court.  When the farmers read the document they went to Federal Court to protest
against it at the Fairness Hearing in March of 1999.  Judge Friedman signed the document even
though all the farmers were against it and everything that the farmers said would happen, happened.

The "system" took the license away from the Black lawyer most instrumental in
developing the case against the USDA, James Myart, then they brought in a former employee of the
Justice Department, Al Pires, to produce a consent decree with holes in it for the government to
slip through. Why? In later articles we will begin to document cases of outright fraud and
wickedness by USDA employees and county employees who stole land from the Black farmers and money
from the US government. If these Black farmers had a jury trial, their stories would not only make a
"brass monkey cry", but would have exposed crooks guilty of federal crimes who are still
alive with the money and deeds to stolen land in their hands.

Welcome to America: Land of the slaves, stolen by liars to their grave.

Peace, Doc

by Dr. Ridgely Abdul Mu’min Muhammad

There were a number of interesting responses to last week’s article "The Mathematics of a
Sinking Ship". In particular one reader wanted to know that if only growing peanuts was
profitable, then why didn’t the Georgia farmers just grow peanuts?

The reader also asked for information to read up on agriculture. First I would suggest that you
read all of the articles under "The Farmer Newsletter" at:

http://muhammadfarms.com/The%20Farmer%20Newsletter.htm

You can also go to a search engine such as Yahoo. I used two different search strings and
selected a few articles for you to read about this whole issue of why don’t farmers just grow one
highly profitable crop:

Search strings: 1. Farming under risk and uncertainty, 2. Farming monoculture profits.

Results: 1.Barriers to adoption: a general overview of the issues http://www.csu.edu.au/research/crsr/ruralsoc/v2n2p10.htm

2. IT WASN’T SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN LIKE THIS … September, 2000

http://www.ces.uga.edu/Agriculture/agecon/issues/ei900.htm

3. Diversity : http://www.bk.psu.edu/academic/sts/SylDiv.htm

In a response to the diversity issue I told our reader that farmers could not easily switch
crops due to rotational issues, the cost of equipment, market and environment risks and
uncertainties. If you put all of your "eggs in one basket", that basket had better be
secure. However, under the cover of the "9/11" tragedies, provisions of a new farm bill
were rushed through congress that scrapped the old peanut program which subsidized the price of
peanuts to US farmers. Now the price of peanuts may be expected to drop to the non-subsidized
market price of about $0.14 per pound instead of $0.30 per pound. Southwest Georgia will soon be up
for sale.

When I compared switching farming enterprises to Ford shifting from cars to aircraft production,
our reader recanted by saying that Ford would change over to producing aircraft if the stockholders
demanded it. However, how long would it take Ford to retool? If we would recall, Ford, GM and
Chrysler had their market shares karate chopped due to the oil crisis in the 70’s. Japan was
already producing fuel efficient cars and it took American car makers almost a decade to make the
transition. Chrysler almost didn’t make it and would not have except for a huge bail-out by the
American tax payers.

In terms of solutions: 1. Any solution to the farmer’s dilemma will either require huge
government subsidies or 2. An extreme shift in consumer behavior. However, due to the governments
desire to rebuild lower Manhattan, save the airlines industry and pursue a war in Afghanistan, it
is doubtful that she will increase her subsidies to save farmers.

America has had only 100 years to experiment with 90% or more of her population living in cities
and dependent on fossil fuels for fertilizer, chemicals and transportation. What you are really
eating is "fossil fuels". Agriculture is no longer a net supplier of energy, it is
energy dependent. What happens when the oil and natural gas run out? Food is produced precariously
far away from the consuming areas. Monoculture requires heavy doses of artificial fertilizers,
pesticides and herbicides, all made from fossil fuels.

Americans eat meat, not because of its nutritional benefits, but because of the meat industry’s
marketing skills. Eighty percent of the farmland is devoted to growing meat, i.e. range land or
feed crops. Meat production requires less labor per dollar and allows those with extensive capital
resources to dominate the market. Meat is also inefficient in terms of energy transformation. Each
step up the food chain from crops reduces the net energy available to the eater by 90%. Have you
ever wondered where cows get their protein?

Vegetables on the other hand are quite labor intensive. For instance, Colquitt County Georgia,
according to a 2001 WALB TV news story, has from 10,000 to 15,000 illegal aliens working primarily
on vegetable farms. For comparison, Terrell County Georgia, where we farm, has a total population
of 11,000 people. How many of these 11,000 people are willing to work long hours in the hot sun for
minimum wage? Cheap food requires slaves.

After you solve the labor problem, then you are faced with a perishable product that must be
delivered to diverse corners of a country 3,000 by 2,000 miles in dimension. Right now Black people
are concentrated in the cities and locked into the food buying patterns that prevent Black farmers
from taking advantage of that potential market. Please view "Graph 3" from the article
"Perfect Crime" at http://muhammadfarms.com/The%20Farmer%20Newsletter.htm
to see how the marketing system has changed over the years. Putting it another way, Black folk no
longer cook. They eat at fast food restaurants or purchase highly processed precooked food items
which are dominated by large retailers and large producers.

The Solution? Start home gardens or set up buying clubs or cooperatives in the cities to
purchase directly from the farmers. The markets in the cities must be developed before the farmers
can grow and ship. In the beginning these coops must go to their local suppliers at the farmers’
markets in their areas or with wholesale distributors of food close to them. Once your volume is
such that you can handle 40,000 pounds (tractor trailer load), then you can contact Black farm
cooperatives and arrange for the production and distribution of items from them. You can find a
list of farm cooperatives at: http://muhammadfarms.com/black_farm_coops.htm.

Please be prepared to pay for your food three months in advance, so that these farmers will not
have to go to the bank to borrow money at interest rates that exceed their expected returns on
investment. Also, by paying in advance this reduces the market risks of the farmers, so that you
won’t change your mind and go back to "massa" once the farmers have sunk their money
into the ground. This means that we will have to learn how to trust and work cooperatively with
each other. OOPS, did I say something wrong?

by Eric Rubin

(Organic farming has been suggested as a possible high profit niche market for Black farmers. We
at Muhammad Farms grew "organic" produce only to have our Black customers complain about
the price, comparing us to the state farmers market prices. WWW.MuhammadFarms.com asked Eric Rubin,
a community activist and organizer, who worked in the food industry for over 14 years as an
entrepreneur and sales manager for National Brands, to help us answer the question of whether Black
farmers should be moving towards growing organic crops. This is his reply.)

A few weeks ago we had a discussion about organic crops and you asked me my opinion. As I stated
I am a supporter of organic crops and look forward to the day that they are available to everyone.

If a farmer is going to sell product as ‘produce’ then the first question is to whom? If it
is to a distributor of organic products then we must look at who is this distributor and to whom are
they aligned with?

There are really two separate but equally important questions. Are the crops being sold as
organic produce to be distributed as such, or are they being sold as organic produce in order to be
used as part of a value added food product?

Within both of these questions, it is important to understand that the farmer is no longer
growing a ‘commodity’. That product that is now ‘organic’ is in fact a ‘value added
product’. It is particular to the market because it has intrinsic value – i.e.. it has been
grown under specific conditions. These conditions create the additional value of the product. The
amount of time, energy, and additional capital invested in creating the ‘organic’ product must
be realized in the sale of the product, and this is where the potential problems lie.

Let us say that the produce is being sold to a distributor that will resell it at retail level as
organic produce. First, that ‘buyer’ is looking at that product as a commodity in relation to
the farmer. If he is buying greens, he is looking at the various farmers who are producing ‘organic’
greens and shopping the best price.. i.e.. ‘commodifying’ the ‘value added’. If many farmers
begin to ‘go organic,’ and supply is greater than demand, then commodity relations develop even
further.

This takes on serious repercussions, as the necessary time and capital outlay for ‘organic
certification’ forces the grower into a niche market at the mercy of the retail
buyer. Where the farmer sees him/herself as investing in creating a value added product, and where
the buyer is selling the product as a value added product – the issue lies in the space between.
The farmer invests more to make more, the buyer sells the value added ‘organic’ produce at
significantly higher markups – yet the buyer relates to the farmer as a producer of a commodity,
and develops and leverages the product based on the laws of supply and demand! This becomes more
evident when we begin to investigate who are the distributors.

For instance Tree of Life, Inc. is one of the largest distributors in the world of natural and
‘ organic’ products. Tree of Life North America is a division of Wessanen’s Natural and
Specialty Foods Group. In their mission & vision statement Wessanen states "…Our
long-term objective is to maximize the value of the capital invested by our shareholders…",
which is no different from any other corporation in the food industry.

This takes on an even more ominous tone when the farmer is selling the organic product to a buyer
who is selling the product to an ‘organic’ manufacturer of organic foods. For in this
relationship the product grown by the farmer is just one of many items that are part of a ‘value
added’ food item.

Supposing a farmer had worked out an agreement with Boca Burgers to supply the soy or other
vegetable components, will the owners of Boca Burger pay fair market price for the ‘organic’
product that the farmer produced? Boca Burger is owned by Oscar Meyer/Kraft, which is owned by
Phillip Morris . One only need to ask any of the producers who supply Kraft to know how they are
squeezed.

Another example is Cascadian Farm, who produce over 150 organic products in eight

food categories. Included are frozen vegetables and fruits, juice concentrates, fruit spreads and
conserves, frozen desserts, meals and entrees, pickles, relishes, and sauerkraut. Cascadian Farm is
a division of Small Planet Foods which is now owned by General Mills.

Let’s look at Worthington Foods who manufacture under the name "Morningstar Farms" a
variety of burgers, patties, breakfast links, corn and veggie dogs; under name
"Worthington" frozen foods, dry burger alternative, and canned vegetarian meat
alternatives; under the name "Natural Touch" burgers, tuna substitute, patties, vege
franks, entree mixes, Roma coffee substitute; and under the name "Loma Linda" canned
vegetarian products and entree and gravy mixes. Worthington Foods is now owned by Kellogg’s.

So in conclusion, until distribution and sales channels can be developed between the farmer and
the consumer that are based on mutual respect and understanding of the farmers relationship to
growing the products, and more so that the farmer has some control in these relationships, the
opportunity for the farmer to become further entrenched in being squeezed by the system of commodity
relationships is in fact increased.

There are in my mind certain opportunities for the small farmer who desires to produce organic
product. One opportunity is to develop not only their own distribution systems, but also the final
place of sale.

Because of the nature of production and distribution, it is in the final sale that the true ‘value’
of a ‘value added product’ is realized. There are in fact two price points for the farmers, the
point of sale at the point of production (the farm), and the point of sale at the final stop on the
distribution chain (retail store or restaurant).

This retail store could be a cooperative that purchases the product directly from the farmer.
Again, this relationship must be based on mutual respect, because the commodity relationship still
remains, (a retailer can and will squeeze the farmer) if he sees that he can increase his margin
because the product must be sold.

The ideal scenario would be to see cooperatives that are partnerships with the farmers and the
various communities, where both components see the intrinsic need of the whole, and work to form a
production/distribution/sale relationship that benefits all. This is both possible and necessary.
(Or as we say at Muhammad Farms, we must control the product from "the land to the man".)

by Dr. Ridgely Abdul Mu’min Muhammad

Now that some of the dust has cleared from "9/11", it is time to look through the dust
and "smoke screen" to get a glimpse of the real "bombs" that are dropping,
"genetic bombs". We here at Muhammad Farms are feverishly working
on our farm and with other Black farmers to be a source for safe wholesome food to a people who
historically have been under attack, terrorized on their own soil, killed and traumatized by a
relentless effort to reduce their populations.

In the process of dying they have also been stigmatized for being immoral and carriers of deadly
diseases due to some curse that goes all the way back to a mythical "Ham". This past week
I viewed an intriguing documentary, "The Syphilis Enigma" which now shows that the scourge
of venereal syphilis did not spread from the new world to the old but probably vise versa. This made
me review the issue of "Bad Blood" where this country experimented with syphilis on 399
Black men. What were they looking for: a biological sterilization weapon?

Now with the big push for genetically modified foods to "save the world from
starvation" one wonders is the improved "food" designed to produce more calories or
reduce certain populations allowing others (spell that Europeans) to eat? It seems that on September
9, 2001 ("9/9") a small piece of news may have been overlooked. So-called white folks have
discovered the perfect genetic weapon against overpopulation.

I’ll stop rambling and let you read these articles that conceptually lead up to the September
9th article, "GM corn set to stop…":

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/secrets2/case6_interview.html

Even before her work on the syphilis-ravaged skeletons at Hull, Roberts had doubts about the New
World origins theory of syphilis — the idea that the sexually-transmitted disease was brought to
Europe by Christopher Columbus’s crew, who had picked it up during sexual contact with native women
during their 1493 voyage to Haiti. "We had found pre-Columbian syphilis in Britain before we
found the Hull skeletons," Roberts says. "About half a dozen sites in Britain have
skeletons with evidence of venereal syphilis. The skeletal evidence is conclusive," she says,
"but the radiocarbon dating isn’t in every case." Pre-Columbian skeletons with signs of
syphilis have also been found elsewhere in Europe, including Naples and Pompeii, and, Roberts says,
at a new excavation in Israel.

http://www.med.virginia.edu/hs-library/historical/apology/index.html

For forty years from 1932 to 1972, 399 African American males were denied treatment for syphilis
and deceived by the United States Public Health Service.

http://www.ccc.govt.nz/OurEnvironment/27/ContraceptiveBait.asp

Genetically-modified plants could hold the key to controlling New Zealand’s burgeoning possum
population.

http://www.muhammadfarms.com/News.htm#Killer Virus
developed

By Paul Tait

http://www.guardian.co.uk/gmdebate/Story/0,2763,549002,00.html

Special report: GM crops debate

Robin McKie, science editor

Sunday September 9, 2001

The Observer

Scientists have created the ultimate GM crop: contraceptive corn. Waiving fields of maize may one
day save the world from overpopulation.

The pregnancy prevention plants are the handiwork of the San Diego biotechnology company Epicyte,
where researchers have discovered a rare class of human antibodies that attack sperm.

"We have a hothouse filled with corn plants that make anti-sperm antibodies," said
Epicyte president Mitch Hein.

———————————————————————————————–

Let me just add:

"There is a war going on that you might want to know,

You’d better find out from Monsanto

(and friends)."

Now you see why "Europe don’t want no terminator food". (from "Terminator
Genes")

Peace, Doc

What will the farmers be able to do with this money? Mr. Grant said that he hoped
that"… they would not spend it all or take it to white banks." He indicated that Black
farmers and Black people in general should know that when the farmers were fighting individually
they got nothing. It was not until they began to organize in 1996 and filed the class action
lawsuits did they began to move the U.S.D.A. to the negotiating table. Mr. Grant points out the
great support that he and the Black farmers got from the Congressional Black Caucus, in particular
Representatives Maxine Waters, John Conyers, Jr., Cynthia McKenny and Eva Clayton, in putting
political pressure on the Congress. He pointed out how such newspapers as the Final Call helped to
get their message out to the masses. Mr.Grant and two other leaders of the B.F.A.A. gave a
presentation to the Board of Laborers of the Nation of Islam bridging alliances that would prove
most vital in demonstrating to the white power structure that the Black farmers were not alone.

However, Mr. Grant is quick to point out that "… no amount of money can
compensate for the loss of life and the destruction of communities caused by the discriminatory
practices of the U.S.D.A." Mr. Eddie Slaughter, vice-president of B.F.A.A. informed us that a
mock trial was scheduled to be held from November 3-5, 1998 on the campus of Howard University to be
aired live on C.N.N. This mock trial was a precursor to the real trial scheduled for February 1,
1999. However, the government quickly settled this case out of court which effectively cancelled the
need for the mock trial thereby reducing the bad publicity that would have been generated by
testimony after testimony of the pain and suffering caused by the U.S.D.A. to Black people.

We must now ask is this form of settlement a precursor to a larger issue of
reparations for the children of former slaves? How much money and then what? If the government gives
$50,000 to every Black man, woman and child, what good would it do?

What industries would Black people invest in to gain control over? Every other
ethnic group that comes to America seems to focus on a certain sector of the economy and move in.
Look at how many motels are owned by East Indians. Look at how many curb markets are owned by the
Koreans and Arabs. What industry do we want: agriculture ($124 billion), mining ($127 billion),
construction ($730 billion), manufacturing ($4.1 trillion), transportation and utilities ($1.1
trillion), wholesale and retail ($4.3 trillion), finance, insurance and real estate ($2.2 trillion),
services ($1.6 trillion)?

What sector of any industry do we control? Let’s look at services. We know that
Black people are some of the best cooks in America. How many restaurant chains do we own? We know
that Black people are some of the best entertainers in the world. How many record companies, movie
studios, radio stations, television stations or communications satellites do we own? We know that
Black people are some of best athletes in the world. How many basketball, football or baseball
franchises do we own? In other words, our chefs, entertainers and athletes are just high priced
slaves working to make somebody else rich.

To control any industry you need capital, cooperation, a willingness to sacrifice, a
long term commitment, knowledge of the industry, a readiness to fight if necessary to protect it. In
other words, money by itself is not the answer. We already have access to over $500 billion per year
in spending change. What are we doing with that? We spend it immediately because we have a short
term time horizon or a high discount rate on future returns. The perceived benefits of long term
investment are directly related to your confidence in the size and security of that return in the
future. In other words a people who have no assurance of freedom, justice and equality of
opportunity will not invest. Freedom, justice and equality should be a given, but in fact it is a
political issue. We know that Black people have been traumatized through centuries of terrorist
activities but we must stop being only a reactionary people.

Black people have developed some political capital due to the mass turnout at the
polls on November 3. Has anyone mentioned how the mass mobilization started by the Million Man March
has politicized, awakened and galvanized the so-called "Forgotten Man" into a hidden
political army able to strike without notice when threatened? Evidently no one warned Newt Ginrgrich.
How do we leverage such new founded clout? What should we ask for? We need to do as Minister
Farrakhan has instructed us, and set up political action committees centered around developing an
agenda for change and a platform of action for our communities. Do not sell your self or your vote
cheap in the year 2000.

Mr. Slaughter emphasizes that Black farmers now need to organize and decide the best
way to use the money that is being offered. "What are we going to grow or raise and where are
we going to sell it? Are we going to continue to use our land as collateral to borrow money from
white banks or are we going to set up our own credit unions? Are we going to continue to try and do
things as individuals or are we going to set up and participate in cooperative ventures and get more
involved in politics?"

We are asking not only Black farmers but all Black people who are concerned with
land retention, its use and the food chain in the U.S. to contact Dr. Ridgely A. Mu’min Muhammad at
(912)995-6619 or Mr. Gary Grant of the B.F.A.A. at (252)826-3017. Let’s get busy and organize. Thank
you for reading this article.

by Dr. Ridgely A. Mu’min Muhammad

We are having a “cotton picking time” here at Muhammad Farms. We
have been here since 1995 and this is the first season that we attempted cotton.
It can cost from $200 to over $300 to plant and pick cotton before you get one
dime. If you plant, say, 100 acres, you will need at least $20,000 in operating
capital.

However, a cotton picker costs $170,000. Of course you can pick cotton by
hand. It will take about 200 hand pickers to keep up with one mechanical cotton
picker. You can either pay someone with a cotton picker $50 per acre to harvest
your cotton or you must have at least 1000 acres of cotton to justify buying
your own picker. Now, to grow 1000 acres of cotton you need at least $200,000
for seeds, chemicals, fertilizer and fuel to plant and cultivate your cotton. So
we decided to experiment with a few hundred acres of cotton for this year.

It was a very dry year, but we were blessed to make an average of 528 pounds
per acre off of our first 72 acre field. We had managed to keep our costs down
to about $158 per acre and the market price when we sold our cotton was $0.607
per pound. Cotton prices reached a peak of $0.73 per pound in 1995, but have
been falling steadily since.

However, even at $0.607 per pound we could have expected a respectable net
return per acre of $162. But here is the kicker. We don’t do our own ginning
or grading, nobody does. Everybody, Black or white, takes their cotton to the
white owned cotton gin. They take a sample of your cotton and send it to another
laboratory somewhere, in our case, Macon. When our cotton samples came back, we
were given a sale price of $0.469 per pound and after ginning expenses we
received $0.41 per pound. So, now instead of clearing $162 per acre, we only
cleared $58 per acre. Now considering that we could have rented that land out
for at least $35 per acre, would you grow cotton or take the sure rental income?
Remember that we had to risk $158 per acre to get back $58, whereas we could
have risked zero and got back $35 per acre.

Being an agricultural economists, I do this type of analysis all the time and
I know that it may seem foreign and boring to most of our readers. However, only
by looking at the facts and the numbers can we get a good understanding of what
the farmer faces, both Black and white, every day. Now add on top of this,
“racism”, and you can see why the $50,000 offered in the settlement of
the class action lawsuit against the USDA is a joke.

In farming we say that “you must do every thing right, then you have a
50/50 chance at making a profit”. Would you go to work everyday and wait a
minimum of 90 days to have a 50 percent chance of getting paid? Worst still
suppose you had to risk your own money in such a job and still had only a 50
percent chance of getting back more than you put in it. Now consider the fact
that you are Black, all the people you depend upon for processing, grading and
buying your product are white and you don’t know how “white” folks
are feeling this year. What would you do?

Oh, did I tell you that you need to clear at least $100 per acre to pay the
mortgage on the farm?

Visit us at http://www.Muhammadfarms.com.

Peace, Doc