"Empathy", simply put, is the ability to place ourselves in the shoes of another. It involves learning the truth of another; not guessing. Learning the truth of another presupposes a genuine interest in that other. It takes more effort than guessing or assuming.

"Empathy" is a major component of what many thinkers call "altruism", a word which has come into the English language from a French word made by the 19th-century French philosopher and sociologist Auguste Comte. It basically means the principle or practice of unselfish concern and/or devotion for the welfare of others (and is opposed to selfishness, egotism, conceit, arrogance, etc.).

The state of mind described in altruism, empathy etc., are major factors in producing the opposite of slander which concerns Surah 113 and 114 of the Holy Quran.

How many of us have ever been arrested, jailed and given time in prison, for a crime or crimes which we did not do? How many of us have suffered one or more times because we looked like someone else and were thought to be where we were not and could not prove to the satisfaction of our accusers that we were innocent? How many of us have done good and experienced the pain of having that good misrepresented as evil, and then were punished while innocent? How many of us for any number of reasons suffered for what we really did not do, never did and would not even have thought of doing?

How many of us have ever been lied on slandered with the result of the destruction of plans you were working on for your family; for your business, etc.? But the question here is how do we really feel about others so victimized?

This is what the Honorable Louis Farrakhan has suffered, day and night for many years in this America. Written slander, (libel) was spewed out on Minister Farrakhan, for years in the New York Post and others, throughout America. Millions have thought evil of him without really knowing the real man. How many of us have thought over what it is like to be in his shoes and to suffer this way in the public?

How does what has happened to Minister Farrakhan make you feel, when you know that he has been held up to public scorn and mockery, on the basis of lies and half-truths and you know the truth of the matter, how do you feel about this?

How do we feel over the fact that a Muslim Brother, in Memphis, Tennessee, was murdered by an another Black brother who is a Muslim by nature, but did not know it and who was enraged over Malcolm's death and believes "the Muslims" did it? Were either of these two Black men even born when Malcolm was killed in 1965? Why should a Muslim, following the Honorable Louis Farrakhan, be hated, despised, mocked and even killed because certain Black men (some of whom may have been Muslims) killed Malcolm X 31 years ago? How many Black people hate or are otherwise uneasy over this subject, on the basis of what the media has taught them to believe about this serious matter?

Since the government was involved in Malcolm's death, what makes us think it stopped manipulating the consequences of his death to ruin Minister Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam? The government and the media have always been thoroughly involved in the miserable condition of Black people in this country.

Those who despise Minister Farrakhan, and we who are with him, because of Malcolm's death, are unknowing victims of an extremely evil set of plans against the rise of our people? These plans involve their destruction, as we and us whom they dislike on the basis of lies and half-truths? Slander and libel are the key tools of these wicked deceivers.

Suppose the Brother, who was murdered on the basis of lies in Memphis, was your own blood brother? Or your blood sister? Your mother or father? How would you feel?

Suppose that gun was pointed at your head by one who angrily yelled at you that he/she was about to shoot you because he/she blindly feels that you were one of those who killed Malcolm even if you were not yet born in 1965, when Malcolm was killed and the gun misfired? Now, you either got away or overcame your would be murderer.

Time passes. You learn that your would be murderer was moved to do so by his reading, or otherwise hearing of reports, generated by the New York Post, which gave the false impression that Malcolm's widow said that the Honorable Louis Farrakhan was directly involved in her husband's death?

Suppose someone tried to physically harm the Honorable Louis Farrakhan over this news story? How would that have affected you?

That did not happen. However, but, I repeat, a Brother was shot and killed as a result of such wicked sander/libel. So, we are all involved in this case. Not one of us even has a right to continued ignorance of this case.

Is not this sufficient cause for us to think carefully before we speak about others slanderously even when they have wronged us?

Minister Farrakhan's teachings which are of God and his position is not to do evil for evil. The Holy Quran teaches to repel evil with what is best.

Slander/libel is a sinful way to react to any form of mistreatment. It always makes the matter worse.

Now, if you were later almost killed as a result of those evil news stories, of the New York Post, would that be enough for you to want to learn all that you could about this case and support Minister Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam as we pursue justice in this case?

Suppose you learned that the New York Post deliberately and with malice, printed what they did even when they had overwhelming evidence to the contrary. The evidence already filed, shows that they knew that the Honorable Louis Farrakhan was innocent and they knew that they were perverting the words of Dr. Betty Shabazz Malcolm's widow to make their case against the Minister. Now, they are spending millions to keep this case from going to trial. WHY?

How many of us know what it is like to be lied on in the public day after day; in the press; over the TV; for 12 or more years to produce hatred and a murderous spirit in others for you? Minister Farrakhan does. So does his family. How many of us knows what it is like to have people twist up your plain words, in the pubic, day after day; year in and year out, in order to set you up for murder? Minister Farrakhan does. So does his family. How many of us know what it is like to face death, year in and year out, on the basis of lies and half-truths, because you are a non-stop doer of good for your people and others? Minister Farrakhan does. So does his family.

The lead attorney for Rupert Murdoch, the New York Post, and the others defendants, is Mr. Howard Squadron. He heads up one of the most powerful legal firms anywhere to be found on this earth. He desired to depose Minister Farrakhan. In civil cases, it is common for the plaintiff to give a deposition. What is unusual, in this case, is that our attorneys objected to the taking of the deposition from Minister Farrakhan, even though he is a plaintiff. Why?

Minister Ava Muhammad stated: "The purpose of a deposition is to ascertain the state of mind of the plaintiff on the issue, the plaintiff�s history on the issue, and the circumstances surrounding the subject matter of the case. In this case, the issue is the assassination of Malcolm X. What makes Minister Farrakhan unique from any other plaintiff, in addition to his stature, is the fact that Minister Farrakhan has spoken and written exhaustively on the subject in the public. He has already thoroughly addressed this subject and withheld nothing. Therefore, a deposition is not necessary. Everything that he has had to say or write with regard to this matter is in the possession of the defendants already."

She continued: "Their objective in seeking to depose him, in our judgment, is to annoy and harass him. Secondly, it is to create a legal document which they can capitalize on to publish an �exclusive,� which will increase their circulation."

They hope to make more mischief with his words, as they have already done and make money too with which to keep up their fight against going to a public trial in this case.

She continued: "We believe they simply desire to confront the Minister and keep him tied up from three days to a week, or more, interrogating him over that what they already have and know. We�re not going to allow that. So we spent over a year litigating that issue and fighting that issue.

"Ultimately, we were able to obtain from the court, what I guess for a lack of a better term is a compromise, in that the judge determined that the she would move the deposition from New York to Chicago, and she instructed the defendants at a certain point that if they desired to depose the leader, they would have to travel to Chicago, and it was at that point that they filed the motion for summary judgment."

Next issue, we'll learn from Minister Abdul Arif Muhammad that their lead attorney, one of the most respected Jews anywhere, became upset and engaged in the same kind of evil which his clients are being sued for. His own words show this.

It is interesting that Mr. Jack Newfeld, who wrote defamatory articles, about the Minister and the Nation of Islam, claims to be an expert on the Minister and the Nation. Now he and his backers seek to exculpate themselves from their slander/libel and they are trying to avoid taking responsibility for his lies in which they are involved.

Their false version of the facts is an attempt to rewrite history. They know that most of the books, about Malcolm's death, though not favorable to the Nation, never mention the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan in any way as even remotely having any involvement, in any way whatsoever, with the assassination of Malcolm X. The New York Post knew this, and more, yet they lied!

Among the most important factors, in dealing with a case involving defamation, is who the plaintiff or the victim is. In some other cases, it may not be of great import. But when we�re talking about defamation or damage to one�s reputation, you have to evaluate what type of reputation it is that is being damaged.

In closing, the deadline for the brief that the Attorneys Arif and Ava Muhammad are filing to fight the judgment handed down by the judge, is October 19, 1996. The opposition will then have a month to respond. Then there is to be oral argument, in the Appellate Division. This will carry us into 1997, the third year of this case, and, in a way of speaking, into the 33rd year since 1964, when the domestic life of the Honorable Elijah Muhammad was wickedly publicized. That is at the root of this case, as anyone knows who has looked into it. Deeper yet is the ultimate root of it all, the mind, will and the integrity of Master Fard Muhammad.