PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Senate apologizes for shame of lynchings



Jolie Rouge
06-13-2005, 08:19 PM
U.S. Senate apologizes for shame of lynchings
By Thomas Ferraro
June 13, 2005


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Senate on Monday formally apologized for having rejected decades of pleas to make lynching a federal crime as scores victims' descendants watched from the chamber's gallery.

On a voice vote and without opposition, the Senate passed a resolution expressing its regrets to the relatives as well as to the nearly 5,000 Americans -- mostly black males -- who were documented as having been lynched from 1880 to 1960.

These deaths occurred without trials, mostly in the South, often with the knowledge of local officials who allowed mob lynchings to become picture-taking, public spectacles. During this period, nearly 200 anti-lynching bills were introduced in Congress, three of which passed the House of Representatives.

But despite the support of the legislation by seven U.S. presidents, the measures died in the Senate with much of the opposition coming from southern lawmakers who raised procedural roadblocks.

Such legislation would have made lynching a federal crime and allowed the U.S. government to prosecute those responsible, including local law enforcement officers.

SIGNATURES MISSING

Dan Duster, a descendant of Ida B. Wells, a former slave who became an anti-lynching crusader, praised senators who publicly backed the resolution of apology and scorned those who did not.

No lawmaker opposed the measure, but 20 of the 100 senators had not signed a statement of support of it shortly before a vote was taken on a nearly empty Senate floor. "I think it's politics. They're afraid of losing votes from people of prejudice," Duster said of those who did not sign the statement of support.

The resolution was first proposed last year by Sens. Mary Landrieu, a Louisiana Democrat, and George Allen, a Virginia Republican, after they read the book, "Without Sanctuary: Lynching Photography in America," a pictorial history by James Allen.

"The more I learned about this terrorism in America, the more committed I became to doing something positive and passing this resolution," Landrieu said.

"The Senate failed these Americans," said Allen. "If we truly want to move forward, we must admit that failure and learn from it."


The resolution expresses apologies not only to the victims of lynchings, but also to their descendants, nearly 200 of whom came to the Capitol to witness passage of the measure.

Also there was James Cameron, 91, believed to be the only known lynching survivor. Cameron was arrested in August 1930 in Marion, Indiana, and taken to jail along with two of his friends for the murder a white man and suspected rape of a white woman.

A mob broke into the jail and pulled the three out. Cameron's two friends were hanged, and a noose was placed around the neck of Cameron, then a 16-year-old shoeshine boy. But as the noose was tightened, a voice reportedly shouted out that Cameron was guilty of no crime. He was returned to his cell and later convicted of being an accessory to the white man's death. He was pardoned in 1993, by then-Gov. Evan Bayh, now a Democratic U.S. senator from Indiana.

"The apology is a good idea, but it still won't bring anyone back," said Cameron. "I hope that the next time it won't take so long to admit to our mistakes."


While most lynching victims were deemed criminal suspects, others had merely gotten into a spat with a white man, perhaps for looking at a white woman. Lynchings refer not only to hangings, but mob executions by beatings, bullets and fire.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, the first black woman to hold the post, praised the Senate for its apology, saying, "better late than never."

"I remember as a kid the stories about lynchings -- everybody's family had at least one story," Rice, who grew up in the South, told MSNBC' "Hardball with Chris Matthews."

"My grandfather, who ran away from home at 13 because he'd gotten into an altercation with a white man over something that happened with his sister, and he was pretty sure that if he hung around, that's what was going to happen," Rice said.


(Additional reporting by Arshad Mohammed)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/congress_lynching_dc;_ylt=Ajt0iWrRkFJnKsqMnfsMXM_s br8F;_ylu=X3oDMTBiNWlwbWFuBHNlYwNjaWQxNjkz


*rather interested in seeing who would be the 20 who did not sign .... *

schsa
06-14-2005, 04:46 AM
What purpose does this serve now? This is the past. It has nothing to do with what is happening today. Most of those people in the Senate and Congress are only doing this as a gesture to get votes. It doesn't make things any better for those who were lynched. It doesn't change our political future.

Empty gestures by men who weren't even in the Senate and Congress when these decisions were made. I don't understand it.

excuseme
06-14-2005, 09:51 AM
Perhaps if you had a family member that had been a victim you would feel different. I don't think it's the passing of the legislature that is what the uproar is about as much as the fact that Congress has repeatedly blocked the bill in the past.


What purpose does this serve now? This is the past. It has nothing to do with what is happening today. Most of those people in the Senate and Congress are only doing this as a gesture to get votes. It doesn't make things any better for those who were lynched. It doesn't change our political future.

Empty gestures by men who weren't even in the Senate and Congress when these decisions were made. I don't understand it.

schsa
06-14-2005, 10:24 AM
They did in the 50's and 60's when Civil Rights were in their infancy. And there were all sorts of reasons that don't make sense today. But if you were going to apologize then go to the graves of those who were lynched and say something to that person and directly to their families. Don't sit in your air conditioned office and see how many votes you can get by saying I'm sorry.