I am writing in response to your coverage of the speech by Nation of Islam leader Conrad Muhammad. I anticipated the Monday edition of the Collegian because of the speech given by Muhammad on Saturday evening. I had seen the protest rally and because that piqued my interest, I decided to go see for myself what he was all about. I was curious also as to what would be in the paper regarding the event. You, the writers for the Collegian, did exactly what I thought you would: You sold out. That's right, you bowed to the pressures of politically correct society. I anticipated an article which accurately exposed the leader for what he is, but instead I read an article praising him for his racism. Why is it that you cannot criticize this man? He stood up in front of an audience of over 1,000 people and proclaimed the black race as chosen by God. He bases this opinion (which he presents as fact) on passages in the Bible which state that those whom the world hates and oppresses are the chosen ones. I do not disagree that blacks have endured hatred and oppression. It is Muhammad's assertion that they are the most hated, the most oppressed, with which I differ. This is strictly a judgment call. Does he not know of the struggle of the Jewish people as far back as the days of Moses? Does he not know the story of the Holocaust? Does he not recognize the struggle women have had since the beginning of time overcoming the pretense that they are stupid and inferior? Does he not witness the present day problems in Bosnia-Herzegovina? It is simply not right for Muhammad to interpret a passage from the Bible and call it fact.

Initially, he called for a rejection of the ways of the past; the ways of oppression, segregation and hatred. By the time he was finished speaking, he had changed the tone of his message and urged blacks to form their own cities, start their own countries, and rise up against the oppression of whites. He said blacks should not support white industry. He urged blacks to work against an integrated society. He called for a voluntary segregation. He denounced interracial relations. Why doesn't he just trash the Supreme Court ruling of Brown vs. Board of Education while he's at it? He told whites to "shut up" and let the blacks speak. Now, I may be mistaken, but where exactly do you see the message of peace? I felt aggression and anger.

He did not stop there either. He encouraged black pride by denouncing whites. "Look what you did to Malcolm X!" he proclaimed to the whites in the audience. He manipulated the blacks in the audience with misleading statements. When referring to the protest preceding his visit, he pointed out that some protesters did not want their tuition money to go toward funding his speech. He distorted this and made it out to the audience as if those who said that were inferring that blacks were not paying tuition. This is a gross misrepresentation of the facts.

I walked into that lecture expecting an eloquent speech by an obviously well-educated speaker. I came to hear a man with Ivy League credentials give his thoughts and advice to blacks as a minority on the campus here at Penn State. What I got instead was an anti-white message with a lot of 25-cent words and all-inclusive stereotypes. He assumed that being white constituted being prejudiced. He accused whites in the audience of various transgressions continually with blanket words such as "you" and "them." He divided the races and called for a recognition of the supremacy of blacks. He constantly blurred the line between pro-black and anti-white.

I am not saying Muhammad had nothing good to say in his message. There actually was a core of truth. He said blacks should educate themselves. They should give back to their communities and break out of the ghettos. Blacks should help one another succeed and achieve greatness like the many generations have done in the past. He called for an increased awareness of the struggles minorities face. This is a message we all need to hear. Blacks, just like any other minority, need to be recognized as competent and capable. Muhammad simply goes about conveying his message the wrong way. I think that minorities need a genuine leader to champion such causes and I don't think Muhammad is that leader. He did not offer an honest argument and he did not emphasize positive change. He called for a kind of retaliation. He led the audience to believe that proclaiming blacks as better would right the wrongs of the past. This is untrue; the racial and unfounded hatred that lead to the oppression of blacks will not be that which leads them out of it.

I wonder how he would have been received, and even if he would be allowed to speak, had he been white and his speech entitled, "White Pride." I don't think a speaker like that would even be allowed funding. He made the comment that if someone like David Duke were on the stage speaking, the audience would recognize the ignorance of his message and therefore not allow him to last five minutes on the stage. Well, I recognized Muhammad's ignorance and still allowed him two and a half hours.