c. 1996 Religion News Service

(Charles W. Colson, former special counsel to Richard Nixon, served a prison term for his role in the Watergate scandal. He now heads Prison Fellowship International, an evangelical Christian ministry to the imprisoned and their families. Contact Colson via e-mail at 71421.1551(AT)compuserve.com.)

(UNDATED) One could charitably say that Louis Farrakhan is, at best, in deep denial about slavery, but he can no longer honestly say there is no independent proof that slavery exists in Africa. While the Nation of Islam leader is outspoken in his condemnation of Jews and others, he remains silent about slave traders, at least when it’s his friends who live in the plantation houses.

He should be called to account.

Farrakhan, who rightly condemned historic American slavery at the Million Man March last year, has been asked about slavery in the Sudan many times, and each time he responds that there is no proof it exists. Many, including this columnist, have charged that Farrakhan is in fact not interested in the truth, but only interested in protecting the Sudan’s Islamic rulers. Farrakhan, in his usual fashion, has denounced such attacks as being either racist in motivation or part of a Jewish conspiracy to tarnish his image.

Interestingly enough, however, he laid a trap in which he was eventually snared. At the end of a news conference last March, he was again asked about slavery, to which he replied:”If slavery exists, why don’t you go as a member of the press? And you look inside of the Sudan and if you find it, then you come back and tell the American people what you have found.” Well, sometimes when you throw down a challenge someone will take you up on it, which is exactly what happened to Farrakhan. Two reporters from the Baltimore Sun, Gilbert A. Lewthwaite and Gregory Kane, went to the Sudan and proved the case that slavery exists in the most dramatic fashion possible: They purchased two human beings.

Lewthwaite and Kane were able to enter the country thanks to English Baroness Caroline Cox and the human rights organization Christian Solidarity International, which got them”on one of its occasional, illegal, daredevil aid flights”into Sudan, as their news stories explained.

Then came the horrors of experiencing a practice that most in the West believe ended long ago. The journalists actually bought two young boys, aged 10 and 12, for around $500 each.

In the midst of this heart-rending story, there were two distinct rays of light: when the journalists freed their slaves _ how strange it is to write such words _ and in the descriptions of the extraordinarily brave Christians targeted by the slave traders.

I was reminded of another persecuted people, the Jews of the Warsaw ghetto, and developed a deeper understanding of what Michael Horowitz, a Jew who played a large part in publicizing Sudanese slavery, meant when he said Christians will be the Jews of the 21st century in the persecution sweepstakes.

Kane wrote that the Sudanese Christians”display their faith unashamedly. Some Catholic Dinkas proudly wear rosaries around their necks. One girl who had a lovely smile and enchanting eyes proudly told us she was a Christian and positively glowed when she told us her name: Regina Bol.” Basketball fans will be interested to know that Regina is the cousin of former National Basketball Association center Manute Bol, and all of us can join Kane in hoping that the worst will not befall her.”I left the Sudan praying that the Arabs’ don’t capture this girl and make her a slave,”Kane wrote.”I also prayed that we here in the West will do what we can to ensure that doesn’t happen.” Which brings us back to Minister Farrakhan. He would have us believe that, despite all his resources and contacts in the Sudan, he has been unable to find proof of slavery while the two Baltimore Sun journalists succeeded so dramatically and quickly. This is, to put it bluntly, unbelievable.

We are left with the sad conclusion that Farrakhan is not truly anti-slavery, only strategically so. He may portray himself as a liberator, but here is a man who defends a regime than enslaves black people 130 years after our Constitution abolished the practice. The most saddening aspect is that Farrakhan could have been such a powerful voice of freedom for the besieged Christian community. He could have brought great pressure to bear against the Islamic Sudanese government.

By remaining silent, Farrakhan has revealed that he is so intent on promoting himself and his messianic mission that he has no concern for blacks who are sold into slavery. He has, by his silence, thoroughly discredited himself. One cannot pretend to have moral authority after consorting _ and protecting _ Arab leaders who allow the selling of human beings into bondage.

Farrakhan has only one option: He can go back to the Sudan and make this demand: Set my people free. If he is not willing to do that, he should be totally ostracized and awarded the anonymity he so richly deserves.

MJP END COLSON