BlaqueKnight said:

If Rihanna is what is considered a "lady" then its no wonder the rest of the world thinks American women are sluts. Your standards have to be pretty damn low to hail Rihanna as any kind of "lady" with the way she carries herself. She's a pop star and most pop stars slut themselves out these days as a standard practice. They sell their looks just as much as they sell their music if not more so (as in Rihanna's case).
Dressing like a tramp and performing provocatively IS made to titilate people. If you think its not, then you are lying to yourself. Titilation does lead to lust and to believe otherwise is self-delusion. Farrakhan's point is that when you present yourself in a lustful way, you are bound to draw that type of attention. How is this not ture? It is. There is no disputing that.

I would gladly and just as easily replace Rihanna's name with many other "pop stars" including some men but that won't make her any less guilty of it. I have much more respect for honesty than feigned sincerity. The problem is that many women want to walk arund with their tits and asses out and try to command the same respect as those women who dress and act decently. Life doesn't work that way. If I walked around in a policeman's uniforn, why would you not think I was a cop?

So what if Rihanna was singled out? What's the problem? She is one of the guilty. You don't have to name everyone individually to cite examples.

The media almost always paraphrases for sensationalism. Of course they would present what he said in a way that is sensationalistic. That's what they do.

This chick is a pop star; there is no need to defend her like she is the first lady. She chose the job she does. Her line of idiot's reasoning was to attempt to condemn him for pointing it out by saying "welll you watched me" and then try to swing her "followers" to jump on the bandwagon by trying to say "see, he's attacking you". Under some circumstances, that can be interpreted as insighting a riot; an arrestable offense in some places. If she said that at a concert or somewhere public and people jumped on him, she'd go to jail for it. How in the hell is that an intelligent response? Its just a wordy way of communicating a childish and immature mentality: "If I'm guilty then you are too" and "ooh, he talking about you - get him".

Straw Man

Hey BK, you might want to say THAT^ first sentence a little louder. I think the Rihanna apologists need to hear AND feel that point a little bit more!

Why do we talk so much mess about Rihanna on the org? She is a performer not a role model and not a self-proclaimed trend setter or example of the state of female pop/r&B music! She hasn't done half the explicit crap that Madonna, Gaga, Patra, Pussycat Dolls, Lil Kim or any other risque female performer has done. In or out of context, the term "filthy" is harsh and Rihanna doesn't deserve that. I swear women can't win in this society. If you cover yourself up and keep your mouth shut you're a boring prude and if you show some skin and express your sexuality in however a playful manner or even as a requirement for your chosen career then you get called every degrading name in the book.

allsmut you're making some great points. I'm not a fan of RiRi. She's hit or miss for me but I certainly don't think she is so far left as an artist that she deserves any criticism from LK or any other religious leader. If they go after her then they need to go after the men who have done the same thing...starting with Jay Z her puppeteer. Hell, he needs to talk about Bey. I've seen more of her ass than Rihanna's ass.

TonyVanDam said:

HotGritz said:

Why do we talk so much mess about Rihanna on the org? She is a performer not a role model and not a self-proclaimed trend setter or example of the state of female pop/r&B music! She hasn't done half the explicit crap that Madonna, Gaga, Patra, Pussycat Dolls, Lil Kim or any other risque female performer has done. In or out of context, the term "filthy" is harsh and Rihanna doesn't deserve that. I swear women can't win in this society. If you cover yourself up and keep your mouth shut you're a boring prude and if you show some skin and express your sexuality in however a playful manner or even as a requirement for your chosen career then you get called every degrading name in the book.

allsmut you're making some great points. I'm not a fan of RiRi. She's hit or miss for me but I certainly don't think she is so far left as an artist that she deserves any criticism from LK or any other religious leader. If they go after her then they need to go after the men who have done the same thing...starting with Jay Z her puppeteer. Hell, he needs to talk about Bey. I've seen more of her ass than Rihanna's ass.

The highlighted part is what is known as a false dilemma.

That is simply not true. Covering yourself does not make you a boring prude. If you are flashing tits and ass, you are flashing tits and ass. It is titilation no matter how you try to spin it. Why should Rihanna be exempt from criticism when she is participating in the same behavior as others who are criticized? Sure, Lil Kim and Madonna have been worse. A person who kills a hundred people is worse than a person who kills two but they are both killers. Like I said, American women want to have it bothways; they want to be treated like the First Lady without having the responsibility of carrying themselves like one. Sorry but it just doesn't work that way.

Neither her voice nor her music do anything for me. Bring back the REAL singers; the ones that make the hair on your arms stand up.

pinkeekeen said:

TonyVanDam said:

Depending on who you ask (Texe Marrs, Tiffany Blake, Lenon Honor, OR Professor Griff, anyone?!?), Rihanna is definitely under demonic influences. To be very fair, I think it was worse during her Dark Rihanna era.

[img:$uid]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/ea/Rihanna_Rated_R.jpg[/img:$uid]

I'm not talking about the hate I don't care if you like her or not. I'm talking about people calling her a whore, slut, etc. Double standards, they're hilarious!

BlaqueKnight said:

allsmutaside said:

BKnight - what is going on with that? Yes she can't sing, but neither can boatloads of other chicks and dudes with hits, and who act the fool in a sexually charged fashion on a national stage. Why is Rihanna to be put on the cross? Again, why not call out a man with those same qualities out by his name? (For the same reason Eminem calls out Moby, cuz his sorry little ass can do it without getting a beat down??) I really don't care too much about Rihanna one way or another. But your response is rather crazy to me relative to many of your other posts. In the course/context of this dialog I really don't know why (and for some reason I am thinking that you are an adult man) grown adult men feel it is ok/cool/acceptable to be calling a young woman a skank, bitch, etc., etc. And with regard to how you broke down her response and how it should be perceived as idiotic - talk about a lack of sincerity and insight. What I am more often sensing from people on this board in defense of M. Farrakhan is 1% about defending his position, and 99% about jumping on the hate-on-Rihanna bandwagon. She does not have to be a skank, deceitful, a bitch, or any number of shitty descriptors because she challenged a Minister of some note (some would say dubious note). I would prefer to hear people talking 100% smack rather than trying to suggest that she can't step with the Minister, cause she just went on a walkabout.

And what is it to "straw man the statement"? I like the sound of that, could you tell me more?

If Rihanna is what is considered a "lady" then its no wonder the rest of the world thinks American women are sluts. Your standards have to be pretty damn low to hail Rihanna as any kind of "lady" with the way she carries herself. She's a pop star and most pop stars slut themselves out these days as a standard practice. They sell their looks just as much as they sell their music if not more so (as in Rihanna's case).
Dressing like a tramp and performing provocatively IS made to titilate people. If you think its not, then you are lying to yourself. Titilation does lead to lust and to believe otherwise is self-delusion. Farrakhan's point is that when you present yourself in a lustful way, you are bound to draw that type of attention. How is this not ture? It is. There is no disputing that.

I would gladly and just as easily replace Rihanna's name with many other "pop stars" including some men but that won't make her any less guilty of it. I have much more respect for honesty than feigned sincerity. The problem is that many women want to walk arund with their tits and asses out and try to command the same respect as those women who dress and act decently. Life doesn't work that way. If I walked around in a policeman's uniforn, why would you not think I was a cop?

So what if Rihanna was singled out? What's the problem? She is one of the guilty. You don't have to name everyone individually to cite examples.

The media almost always paraphrases for sensationalism. Of course they would present what he said in a way that is sensationalistic. That's what they do.

This chick is a pop star; there is no need to defend her like she is the first lady. She chose the job she does. Her line of idiot's reasoning was to attempt to condemn him for pointing it out by saying "welll you watched me" and then try to swing her "followers" to jump on the bandwagon by trying to say "see, he's attacking you". Under some circumstances, that can be interpreted as insighting a riot; an arrestable offense in some places. If she said that at a concert or somewhere public and people jumped on him, she'd go to jail for it. How in the hell is that an intelligent response? Its just a wordy way of communicating a childish and immature mentality: "If I'm guilty then you are too" and "ooh, he talking about you - get him".

Straw Man

So what if Rihanna was singled out? What's the problem?

She is young, and aside from having an under-devloped critical perspective, she seems to have many men in her life to lead her astray in said development. In stead of this assaultive angle of calling her out, perhaps a conversation could happen and a young person could be educated and brought along, mentored and encouraged. My feeling is that there is a good measure of hatred for women who run their own game at play here.

You don't have to name everyone individually to cite examples.

Do you have to name anyone? The truth is that the intersection of politics, gender, race and class issues stewing here are far too deep to assign any amount of responsibility to any one person, particularly Rihanna. And further, the use of Rhianna as a beacon to draw people into the conversation devalues its content. And her name was used in an attempt to draw people in, no doubt, another problem I am having with this scenario.

I don't neccesarily disagree with some of the additional content in your post. But in using Rihanna to instigate this conversation Minister Farrakhan seems to abdicate his responsibility as an elder.

BlaqueKnight said:

HotGritz said:

Why do we talk so much mess about Rihanna on the org? She is a performer not a role model and not a self-proclaimed trend setter or example of the state of female pop/r&B music! She hasn't done half the explicit crap that Madonna, Gaga, Patra, Pussycat Dolls, Lil Kim or any other risque female performer has done. In or out of context, the term "filthy" is harsh and Rihanna doesn't deserve that. I swear women can't win in this society. If you cover yourself up and keep your mouth shut you're a boring prude and if you show some skin and express your sexuality in however a playful manner or even as a requirement for your chosen career then you get called every degrading name in the book.

allsmut you're making some great points. I'm not a fan of RiRi. She's hit or miss for me but I certainly don't think she is so far left as an artist that she deserves any criticism from LK or any other religious leader. If they go after her then they need to go after the men who have done the same thing...starting with Jay Z her puppeteer. Hell, he needs to talk about Bey. I've seen more of her ass than Rihanna's ass.

The highlighted part is what is known as a false dilemma.

That is simply not true. Covering yourself does not make you a boring prude. If you are flashing tits and ass, you are flashing tits and ass. It is titilation no matter how you try to spin it. Why should Rihanna be exempt from criticism when she is participating in the same behavior as others who are criticized? Sure, Lil Kim and Madonna have been worse. A person who kills a hundred people is worse than a person who kills two but they are both killers. Like I said, American women want to have it bothways; they want to be treated like the First Lady without having the responsibility of carrying themselves like one. Sorry but it just doesn't work that way.

You get accused of being prudish or even worse "enslaved" if you are covered up and you get accused of being filthy or even worse "whoreish" if you are showing what some deem as too much skin, that is the reality of cultural and sexual double standards. We live in a world where women still get criticized for breastfeeding in public which is a natural function of motherhood and why women have tits in the first place.

When and where have you seen Rihanna's tits and ass other than the naked cell pics she took for her then boyfriend Chris Brown? My guess is you haven't. None of us have. It is one thing to criticize Rihanna as a performer but to call her "filthy" is in fact an assault on her character which is a different thing than her artistry. We don't personally know this woman. The criticism of her is disturbing because IMO it comes from the same place as the criticism she received when she got physically abused by her boyfriend. It seems way too easy to make negative comments toward women for the same things we don't deem as negative when done by men.

As for her contemporaries, I am not saying that Madonna and Kim are indeed worse so much as they have done more outrageous things and have dressed more scantilly yet LF is not calling them out. To my knowledge he has never mentioned Lil Kim directly and I doubt he spends time thinking about Madonna. Personally I like they way many female rock & pop stars dress. I can even role with some of Gagas' crazy ass outfits. It's about appreciating a beautiful woman making fashion strides or faux paus and that's all Rihanna is doing. She certainly doesn't dress filthy. You mention titilation. If a person will be titilated then they will be titilated whether they see an ankle or a breast. That is a whole other argument. If LF wants to talk about filth and swine then he needs to attack the porn industry. There is all the filth and swine one could ever imagine.

p.s. American women don't want it both ways. They want to define for themselves what is ladylike and what isn't...not have it defined for them least by some 77 year old religious leader.

Here's the deal! Rihanna needs to stay off Twitter trying to case conflicts and drama. She wasn't tweeting a damn thing when Chris was whipping that ass. Now that she can get into drama without catching a beatdown she's quick with the comebacks and shade! Pipe down and keep givng Drake lapdances!

allsmutaside said:

BlaqueKnight said:

If Rihanna is what is considered a "lady" then its no wonder the rest of the world thinks American women are sluts. Your standards have to be pretty damn low to hail Rihanna as any kind of "lady" with the way she carries herself.

Also, Straw Man - very interesting. I will have to run around barefooted in that site soon.

And Also, I think it is a leap that no one who is defensive for Rihanna here has made - the "lady" part that is. But by the same token there is also no need for her to be a slut and so forth, either. The whole Madonna/Whore thing is played out, women as well as men deserve more.

HonestMan13 said:

Here's the deal! Rihanna needs to stay off Twitter trying to case conflicts and drama. She wasn't tweeting a damn thing when Chris was whipping that ass. Now that she can get into drama without catching a beatdown she's quick with the comebacks and shade! Pipe down and keep givng Drake lapdances!

I think if she had tweeted about that incident soon after it happened it would not have fared well for her. She did the right thing by waiting for some of the hoopla to die down and then do her television interview. Plus I think the matter was still sinking in for her. What do you do when it's all out in the news how your lover socked both your eyes and nearly tore your lip off? She's just growing up a bit and is probably getting to that point in her life where she cares less what people think of her. Is that a good thing? Time will tell.

Two things i have learned, One is never listen to what people have to say that are in some form of Clergy, the whole idea that some person knows more or is better than you, is moronic, and insanity, which sums up the idea of religions at the core, peace and faith based out of murdering others. Next is i wouldnt listen to the minister since he is ranting racist, so i dont even have to hear his opinions on others, i know where and what they are based in. BUT i will say there are bigger issues in the world than what Rihanna wears or sings about, TRY the fact that everyone on earth is so damn focused on BS and not the real picture, preach that so called holy man.

WORD! Amen!

lastdecember said:

Two things i have learned, One is never listen to what people have to say that are in some form of Clergy, the whole idea that some person knows more or is better than you, is moronic, and insanity, which sums up the idea of religions at the core, peace and faith based out of murdering others. Next is i wouldnt listen to the minister since he is ranting racist, so i dont even have to hear his opinions on others, i know where and what they are based in. BUT i will say there are bigger issues in the world than what Rihanna wears or sings about, TRY the fact that everyone on earth is so damn focused on BS and not the real picture, preach that so called holy man.

lastdecember said:

Two things i have learned, One is never listen to what people have to say that are in some form of Clergy, the whole idea that some person knows more or is better than you, is moronic, and insanity, which sums up the idea of religions at the core, peace and faith based out of murdering others. Next is i wouldnt listen to the minister since he is ranting racist, so i dont even have to hear his opinions on others, i know where and what they are based in. BUT i will say there are bigger issues in the world than what Rihanna wears or sings about, TRY the fact that everyone on earth is so damn focused on BS and not the real picture, preach that so called holy man.

You actually make some really good points.

None of us really know for sure if there is or isn't a deity/multiple deities, not only that, none of us can say for sure what She/He/It/They want or expect of us, so the idea of other people preaching and handing down judgments and lists of rules and telling others they have to be this or that way, like they know for a fact that's what 'God' would want...is fucking crazy.

And, yes, I know that was a hell of a run-on sentence.

armpit said:

lastdecember said:

Two things i have learned, One is never listen to what people have to say that are in some form of Clergy, the whole idea that some person knows more or is better than you, is moronic, and insanity, which sums up the idea of religions at the core, peace and faith based out of murdering others. Next is i wouldnt listen to the minister since he is ranting racist, so i dont even have to hear his opinions on others, i know where and what they are based in. BUT i will say there are bigger issues in the world than what Rihanna wears or sings about, TRY the fact that everyone on earth is so damn focused on BS and not the real picture, preach that so called holy man.

You actually make some really good points.

None of us really know for sure if there is or isn't a deity/multiple deities, not only that, none of us can say for sure what She/He/It/They want or expect of us, so the idea of other people preaching and handing down judgments and lists of rules and telling others they have to be this or that way, like they know for a fact that's what 'God' would want...is fucking crazy.

And, yes, I know that was a hell of a run-on sentence.

Yeah i mean im not trying to shoot down peoples faith in something, if you have it and it brings u some peace and solace then go with it, and it guides you in life and how to treat people. But my issues are most of the time, people preach what others should do, but do people really live the way a so called God or Jesus says you should? are people donating money every week from their paycheck to the poor? I mean here in NYC there is always a hand-out from a homeless person, how many times do you/me walk by that hand? jesus wouldnt. So thats one thing, the other like i said, i cant listen to someone say a priest or preacher, because they are NOT anything more than me, they dont have power, and yet we approach them as if they are above "us", no one is above you or should be put above you.

HonestMan13 said:

Here's the deal! Rihanna needs to stay off Twitter trying to case conflicts and drama. She wasn't tweeting a damn thing when Chris was whipping that ass. Now that she can get into drama without catching a beatdown she's quick with the comebacks and shade! Pipe down and keep givng Drake lapdances!

Huh? I disagree that she's trying to cause conflicts. She's answered a few critics, is all.

And just because she got beat up at one time doesn't mean she cannot find her voice and learn to speak up for herself. To me it looks like that beating, and the betrayal and humiliation of having her battered photos leak from the police (and now the hospital) helped shape the more outspoken person she is today. Having survived trauma like that can give you a certain resolve.

I cannot believe how long and detailed this thread has become. lol It really seems like much ado about nothing. Was her wine & grind with Drake that lethal? I didn't think so when I watched it. Or was it the chemistry that made it seem more potent? I just don't see what the fuss is about. I've seen much worse...

Go all the way back to the 60's and you will find Farrakhans message to be consistant. The song "Revolutionary Generation" was inspired by his Mother's Day sermon. He is a religious figure, it matters not that you share his views, this is his stance. Go to your local priest, ministor, pastor, chaplain, rabbi, witch doctor etc, and ask him or her about Rihanna public personna and how it fits into their teaching of morality, chastity, virtue, modesty or what have you. Do you think it will be any different? He called her out as an example people would recognize. Look up the definition of example. So you don't have a religious figure in your life? Then this argument is not for you. It should provide no conlict, leave it alone. As with everything else in life, take what will benefit you from his words, and pass on the rest.

i am no fan of rihanna but Farrakhan should mind his own business

hhhhdmt said:

i am no fan of rihanna but Farrakhan should mind his own business

The moral influence of generations of young people is his business.

Graycap23 said:

She is WAYYYY out of her league having any sort of dialog with Louis.

she needs to stop using twitter for matters other than her music.... she needs to tone down her use as it will come back to bite her in the ass!

get the PR in fast baby girl! focus on your music and stuff for fans ......haters can look after themselves....

leonche64 said:

Go all the way back to the 60's and you will find Farrakhans message to be consistant. The song "Revolutionary Generation" was inspired by his Mother's Day sermon. He is a religious figure, it matters not that you share his views, this is his stance. Go to your local priest, ministor, pastor, chaplain, rabbi, witch doctor etc, and ask him or her about Rihanna public personna and how it fits into their teaching of morality, chastity, virtue, modesty or what have you. Do you think it will be any different? He called her out as an example people would recognize. Look up the definition of example. So you don't have a religious figure in your life? Then this argument is not for you. It should provide no conlict, leave it alone. As with everything else in life, take what will benefit you from his words, and pass on the rest.

Timmy84 said:

She was ignorant enough to even go on Twitter. None of them should be judging the other. JMHO.

[Edited 3/2/11 11:22am]

If she wanted to give a response, then she should have done it in a more intelligent manner through other means. Responding the way she did just makes her look childish and immature. I agree, no one should judge the other and I'm not even a big fan of Farrakhan as is, but still she's over 18 so she should act like. Just sayin'.

Timmy84 said:

BklynBabe said:

Nobody has taken Farrakhan seriously for decades!

That black historian (his name escapes me for some reason, I wanna say it's John Hope Franklin) said that Farrakhan was about media liberation or something like that. In other words, he wasn't shit.

i meant to get back to you on this tim, but i totally forgot. it's JOHN HENRIK CLARKE, one of the greatest historians of all times (along with ivan van sertima) who had some stinging words for minister farrakhan.

he stated that farrakhan wasn't serious about black autonomy/self-sufficiency, essentially because he supports organizations not necessarily beneficial to the economic empowerment of black people. he has stated that he could be using the money to fund black limo companies but instead he rides limos made by other people. something to that effect.

[Edited 3/3/11 5:39am]

[Edited 3/3/11 5:39am]

WaterInYourBath said:

Graycap23 said:

She is WAYYYY out of her league having any sort of dialog with Louis.

For. Real.

She really needs to sit down somewhere. Her mind wouldn't be able to handle even one sentence of rebuttle from Min. Farrakhan....Seriously. She's setting herself up to look real stupid.

Can you imagine if she had a sit-down with him? He'll have her ass crying and feeling like a dumbass as soon as the first sentence comes out of his mouth.

MJJstudent said:

Timmy84 said:

That black historian (his name escapes me for some reason, I wanna say it's John Hope Franklin) said that Farrakhan was about media liberation or something like that. In other words, he wasn't shit.

i meant to get back to you on this tim, but i totally forgot. it's JOHN HENRIK CLARKE, one of the greatest historians of all times (along with ivan van sertima) who had some stinging words for minister farrakhan.

he stated that farrakhan wasn't serious about black autonomy/self-sufficiency, essentially because he supports organizations not necessarily beneficial to the economic empowerment of black people. he has stated that he could be using the money to fund black limo companies but instead he rides limos made by other people. something to that effect.

[Edited 3/3/11 5:39am]

[Edited 3/3/11 5:39am]

I still have issues with Minister Farrakhan over that mess with Malcolm X.

Ministers have talked that stuff about performers since the days of Elvis. If a minister were to say some stuff like that about me, I'd be flattered because I'd know I was doing something right.

.

.

.

[Edited 3/3/11 8:04am]

uPtoWnNY said:

MJJstudent said:

i meant to get back to you on this tim, but i totally forgot. it's JOHN HENRIK CLARKE, one of the greatest historians of all times (along with ivan van sertima) who had some stinging words for minister farrakhan.

he stated that farrakhan wasn't serious about black autonomy/self-sufficiency, essentially because he supports organizations not necessarily beneficial to the economic empowerment of black people. he has stated that he could be using the money to fund black limo companies but instead he rides limos made by other people. something to that effect.

[Edited 3/3/11 5:39am]

[Edited 3/3/11 5:39am]

I still have issues with Minister Farrakhan over that mess with Malcolm X.

I was hoping that some folks on here wised up in the past 24 hours but apparently I was dead wrong. Some folks on here are still trying to make this a Rihanna vs Farrakhan beef like a dumb fuck, when it's been clearly documented that he wasn't attacking Rihanna personally, or even professionally nor her fans. But some people just don't learn, now we're heading into another territory that has nothing to do with nothing in attacking Farrakhan and of all things using Malcolm X to attack him.

I'm not only a 5%er, but I know the history of the NOI thoroughly, probably more than anybody on here, and let me say now that you don't know half the story so you wouldn't want to go there, trust me, it's deep. Plus this is not the proper thread to discuss that.

[Edited 3/3/11 8:40am]

armpit said:

Graycap23 said:

She is WAYYYY out of her league having any sort of dialog with Louis.

I was thinking that too. Which isn't to say I don't think his comments were wrong and in poor taste, but I think the best way to handle him would've been to say nothing and let the rest of the world heckle the shit out of him.

So, she spanked him and then let the world heckle the shit out of him. Sweet.

musicjunky318 said:

BklynBabe said:

Nobody has taken Farrakhan seriously for decades!

Untrue.

If he is a man of spirituality and consequence, why the hell does he resort to using Rihanna to court public attention? Is his agenda not strong enough to pull the public on his own? Regardless of how it may have been blown out proportion or context by some in the media, it was a cheap move that could be expected from someone of much less import than Minister Farrakhan is said to have.

thatruth said:

uPtoWnNY said:

I still have issues with Minister Farrakhan over that mess with Malcolm X.

I was hoping that some folks on here wised up in the past 24 hours but apparently I was dead wrong. Some folks on here are still trying to make this a Rihanna vs Farrakhan beef like a dumb fuck, when it's been clearly documented that he wasn't attacking Rihanna personally, or even professionally nor her fans. But some people just don't learn, now we're heading into another territory that has nothing to do with nothing in attacking Farrakhan and of all things using Malcolm X to attack him.

I'm not only a 5%er, but I know the history of the NOI thoroughly, probably more than anybody on here, and let me say now that you don't know half the story so you wouldn't want to go there, trust me, it's deep. Plus this is not the proper thread to discuss that.

[Edited 3/3/11 8:40am]

IMO, any one person can research history all they want to...history can also be "altered" to tell a different story other than the real one....so unless you was there in the absolute flesh during that time period and seen for yourself with your own two eyes, then really no one, not even you yourself, can say what went down between Malcolm and Farrakahn for sure. Just sayin'.