From October 20, 1973 to April 20, 1974, San Francisco was rocked by a series of random, brutal attacks against whites. The assailant was at first thought to be a lone black gunman.
The toll finally reached 16 murders, five woundings, one rape, and the attempted kidnapping of three children.
The rampage, however, was not limited to San Francisco. Throughout California–from Bakersfield to San Diego–at least 93 other whites were murdered, according to later police investigations.
To end the San Francisco slaughter, teams of police decoys roamed the streets, posing as hitchhikers, a favorite target of the supposed lone gunman.
To prevent ham radio operators from honing in on their operation, the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD)used a special high-frequency “zebra” radio band.
When the use of this became known, the slaughters were dubbed “the Zebra case” by the media. Most people assumed the term referred to black-on-white crime.
But the killer failed to blunder into any of these ambushes.
On April 20, 1974, then-Mayor Joseph Alioto–desperate to end the slaughter–authorized a massive, city-wide dragnet.
Over 600 young black males were stopped and questioned by police who were armed with only a vague description of the killer, as given by surviving victims. Some blacks were stopped so many times they were given special ID cards to prevent future stops.
Civil libertarians and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) protested vigorously. The NAACP filed a complaint with U.S. District Judge Alfonso J. Zirpoli in San Francisco.
Just six days after the dragnets began, Zirpoli declared the stops illegal.
In San Francisco, the tourist trade fell off. Many whites stopped going outside after dark. Some whites began talking about forming vigilante committees and spreading similar terror among blacks.
Then, on April 22, 1974, a break finally came in the case.
Anthony Cornelius Harris, a tall, thin, handsome member of the Nation of Islam–otherwise known as the Black Muslims–came forward as a police witness.
At 28, he was a fifth-dan kung-fu expert who always dressed well and spoke softly. He also had firsthand knowledge of the “Zebra murders.”

Anthony Harris
Tne killings, said Harris, weren’t the work of a crazed loner. They were being carried out by a group of militant Black Muslims who made use of elaborate security precautions.
Harris’ intimate knowledge of the killers stemmed from their having been among his closest friends for over six months.
According to Harris, the killers had repeatedly tried to enlist him as an accomplice. But Harris–so he later claimed–could not bring himself to commit cold-blooded murder. This led his friends to suspect that Harris might be a police informer or agent.
Harris began fearing for his life. He also wanted the $30,000 reward being offered for the capture of the still-supposed lone gunman.
On May 1, 1974, police–acting on Harris’ information–arrested seven suspects.
Chief Assistant District Attorney W.H. Guibbini asked for high bail for three of the suspects after their indictment. Presiding Superior Court Judge Clayton V. Horn raised it to $300,000 each.
The accused killers remained in jail before and during their trial.
Four of these were tried and convicted. On March 29, 1976, they were sentenced to prison for life.
They were Larry Craig Green, 22; Manuel Moore, 29; Jessie Lee Cooks, 29; and J.C. Simon, 29. They appealed their convictions to the California Supreme Court–which affirmed them.
Jessie Cooks, Manuel Moore, J.C. Simon and Larry Craig Green
During his testimony as a prosecution witness, Harris was guarded constantly by San Francisco police.
When the SFPD’s resources began to be strained, Harris was placed on the Witness Security Program, operated by the U.S. Marshals Service for the Justice Department.
Also known as WITSEC, it offers protection, relocation and new identities to those who testify against organized crime groups.
Harris was eventually given a new name and relocated to a series of different states. He received a portion of the $30,000 reward he was seeking. Then he vanished altogether.
What follows is an inside account of the “Zebra” death cult, as depicted through the grand jury testimony of the star witness against the killers: Anthony C. Harris.
* * * * *
Born in Long Beach, California, in 1946, Anthony Cornelius Harris got as far as the sixth grade. He clashed often with police and, on January 3, 1969, he was convicted for assaulting a policeman.
He was released from prison in May, 1970, when he won a reversal of his sentence at the California Supreme Court.
But he was once again arrested and convicted, in 1971, of second-degree burglary in Los Angeles. For this, he drew a sentence at San Quentin prison.
And he also met two of the future “Zebra” killers: Manuel Moore and Jessie Lee Cooks.
Cooks had been convicted of robbery; Moore had been sent to prison for burglary. Both wanted Harris, a fifth-dan kung-fu expert, to teach them the martial arts.
According to Harris, Cooks wanted to learn kung-fu so he could kill whites “because they had castrated and killed our ancestors and stomped our babies’ heads in.”





9/11 ATTACKS, ABC NEWS, BOKO HARAM, CBS NEWS, CENSORSHIP, CNN, EDWARD R. MURROW, FACEBOOK, FIRST AMENDMENT, INVESDTIGATIVE PROJECT ON TERRORISM, ISLAM, ISLAMIC TERRORISM, JIHAD, NBC NEWS, OSAMA BIN LADEN, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS, STEVEN EMERSON, THE GUARDIAN, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER
STANDING UP FOR–AND TO–TERRARABISM: PART TWO (END)
In History, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on June 5, 2014 at 12:10 amThe United States has fallen prey to Political Correctness, and thus refuses to acknowledge a connection between Islamic terrorism and the Islamic religion.
Even worse, those who dare produce evidence of such a link–often in the words of the terrorists themselves–are marked for attacks on their integrity.
So wrote Steven Emerson, founder and executive editor of The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT), in an ad/editorial published in The New York Times in late May.
From that ad:
“Our nation’s security and its cherished value of free speech has been endangered by the bullying campaigns of radical Islamic groups, masquerading as ‘civil rights’ organizations, to remove any reference to the Islamist motivation behind Islamic terrorist attacks.
“These groups have pressured or otherwise colluded with Hollywood, the news media, museums, book publishers, law enforcement and the Obama Administration in censoring the words ‘Islamist’, ‘Islamic terrorism’, ‘radical Islam’ and ‘jihad’ in discussing or referencing the threat and danger of Islamic terrorism.”
Among the examples Emerson sited of the corrosive effects of Political Correctness on America’s anti-terrorist policy:
And he posed the disturbing question: “How can we win the war against radical Islam if we can’t even name the enemy?”
Yet many on the Left believe this is a question that should not even be asked.
One of those is Raya Jalabi, a copy editor for the liberal British newspaper, The Guardian.
Raya Jalabi
Jalabi was enraged by the IPT’s ad/editorial.
Jalabi wrote: “Why would the New York Times stoop to running an Islamophobe’s ad?” She went on to describe the ad as “gratuitously offensive on racial, religious or ethnic grounds.”
She then took issue with the IPT’s “plea for readers to ‘learn more’ about the unnamed terror groups wreaking havoc on these United States.” As if education is, in itself, something to avoid.
Jalabi then railed against “an ‘education’ pamphlet that urges citizens to fight back against the ‘campaign of censorship’ that the supposedly ‘main radical Islamic groups’ have been waging against the most sacred freedom: free speech.’
“Never mind,” she asserted, “that the groups whom the IPT calls ‘radical Islamist terrorists’ are actually mainstream Muslim-American groups–like the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Muslim Students Association [MSA].””
Click here: Why would the New York Times stoop to running an Islamophobe’s ad? | Raya Jalabi | Comment is free | theguardian.c
Yet on October 3, 1993, the FBI electronically monitored a meeting between members of CAIR and the terrorist organization Hamas.
According to the FBI: “The participants went to great length and spent much effort hiding their association with the Islamic Resistance Movement [Hamas].”
And in 2007 CAIR was named, along with 245 others, by U.S. Federal prosecutors in a list of unindicted co-conspirators in a Hamas funding case involving the Holy Land Foundation.
In 2009 the FBI stopped working with CAIR outside of criminal investigations due to its designation.
Click here: Council on American–Islamic Relations – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
And the Muslim Students Association has had its own share of terrorist adherents. According to Jihad Watch:
Click here: Mainstream media buries Tsarnaev connection to Muslim Brotherhood-linked Muslim Student Association : Jihad Watch
Jalabi congratulated herself on Twitter for her attack on IPT: “Friday is cool because I can call out #Islamophobia and thus be part of the campaign of censorship trying to take down America….”
Click here: Twitter / rayajalabi: Friday is cool because I can …
Sixty years ago, on March 9, 1954, at the height of the Joseph McCarthy “Red Scare,” Edward R. Murrow, the most respected broadcast journalist in America, offered an eloquent argument against censorship:
Edward R. Murrow
“We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men—not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate and to defend causes that were, for the moment, unpopular….“
That argument–like the First Amendment–still stands, and both are worth remembering.
Share this: