Scarsdale Public Schools



1954: Brown v. Board of Education (1954)Brown v. Board of Education (1954) is know widely acknowledged as one of the greatest Supreme Court decisions in American History. Effectively repealing Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), Brown unanimously concluded that “in the field of public education, the doctrine of separate but equal has no place”. This image is of a mother, Nettie Hunt, sitting with her daughter, Nickie, on the steps of the Supreme Court, on May 18th 1954, the day after the Supreme Court’s historic decision. Nettie is holding a newspaper with the headline “High Court Bans Segregation in Public Schools.” (source: )1955: Montgomery Bus Boycott“People always say that I didn’t give up my seat because I was tired, but that isn’t true. I was not tired physically, or no more tired than I usually was at the end of a working day. I was not old, although some people have an image of me as being old then. I was forty-two. No, the only tired I was, was tired of giving in…. When I declined to give up my seat, it was not that day or bus in particular. I just wanted to be free, like everybody else.”?– Rosa Parks.Around 6 p.m., Thursday, December 1, 1955, in downtown Montgomery, Rosa Parks paid her fare and sat in an empty seat reserved for blacks. In Montgomery, segregation laws mandated that the first four rows of bus seats were reserved for whites, although more than 75% of the city’s bus system riders were blacks. As white-only seats in the bus filled up, the bus driver demanded that she gave her seat up. When Parks refused to give up her seat, a police officer arrested her.?Two hours after her arrest, the long-time NAACP activist was released on $100 bail. By midnight, a plan had been hatched for a citywide bus boycott, to which a young Baptist minister named Martin Luther King Jr. would later be elected to direct. The boycott lasted 381 days, until the Supreme Court ruled that segregation on buses was illegal.?Although Parks was not the first black bus rider in Montgomery to refuse to give up her seat, Parks’ case became the one the legal challenge was based upon, and it was the case’s success, rather than Parks herself, that?ignited the modern civil rights movement.On Dec. 21, 1956 — the day after the United States?Supreme Court ruled Montgomery’s segregated bus system illegal –?United Press International staged a photo-op of Mrs. Parks sitting in front of a white man on a different bus.?The journalists and members of the civil rights community wanted an image that would dramatize what had occurred and asked reluctant Mrs. Parks to pose for the picture.?Ironically, the picture UPI intended as showing the bus integration came to symbolize Park’s protest, which happened over a year before. A UPI journalist Nicholas Chriss posed as the hard-eyed white man behind Parks.(Source: )1957: The Little Rock NineFollowing the decision of Brown v Board of Education (1954), the city of Little Rock, Arkansas decided to desegregate its schools system, starting with the attendance of nine black students, known as “the Little Rock Nine”, at Central High School, a previously all-white school. On the first day of School, September 4th 1957, the nine were supposed to meet to go together as a group to school. But in that morning there was confusion and one student – Elizabeth Eckford - took a city bus to school by herself. When she arrived at the School she was turned away by the National Guard (which was placed at the school by Arkansas’ segregationist governor Orval Faubus to prevent the black students from integrating the school). The photograph of Elizabeth Eckford, by herself, outside the school, waiting to take a bus home, and surrounded by a jeering mob has become an iconic image of the Civil Rights Movement. Elizabeth Eckford recalled: As I stepped out into the street, the people surged forward. . . I had looked in the face of a woman for help because I had been raised to look to adults for help, and she spat on me. That was the first time I'd ever known that there are adults who would knowingly act to hurt a child.1961: Freedom RidersThis photograph, taken by Anniston, Alabama Star reporter Joseph Postiglione, highlight the horrors and injustices of the attacks on Greyhound and Trailways buses when interracial groups of passengers, known as the Freedom Riders, rode from Washington, D.C. to the Deep South. Even though the federal government had passed an Interstate Commerce Commission law stating that it was illegal to segregate public interstate facilities, this federal law was officially ignored throughout the South with separate white and "colored" facilities enforced at bus and train stations. This protest was a way of drawing attention to the continued segregation in public facilities, by organizing black and white protestors on a bus ride throughout the South. The Freedom Riders were on a journey sponsored by the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), a human rights organization dedicated to peaceful, nonviolent protests against injustice. They met resistance in other southern states, but the violence they encountered in Anniston and Birmingham made history. As it arrived, a white mob attacked the bus with iron pipes and baseball bats and slashed its tires.? The terrified bus driver hastily drove out of the station, but the punctured tires forced the bus to pull off the road in a rural area outside of Anniston. The white mob that pursued the bus, fire bombed it and held the doors shut preventing riders from exiting the burning bus. Finally an undercover policeman drew his gun, and forced the doors to be opened. The mob pulled the Freedom Riders off the bus and beat them with iron pipes. The bus became completely engulfed in flames, and was completely destroyed.?(Source: )1960: Sit-InsOn February 1st 1960 four African American college students from North Carolina A+T College (an all-black college) at down at a “whites only” Woolworth’s lunch counter in Greensboro, North Carolina and ask to be served. The shop was open to all customers regardless of color, but the restaurant was for whites only. When they asked for food, they were refused service and asked to leave. The students had done research on what they were doing and had read a handout on tactics of resistance by CORE. This direct action by Ezell Blair Jnr, David Richmond, Franklin McCain and Joseph McNeil (The Greensboro Four) sparked off the so-called sit-ins. The idea for the sit-in was born the night before the protest began. McNeil had recently been refused service at a diner in Greensboro’s bus terminal. He related his anger about the incident to close friends McCain, Blair, and Richmond in their dormitory. The four, who had discussed the problem of racial injustice many times before, decided it was time to stop complaining and act. They agreed to stage a sit-in, a type of peaceful demonstration originating in the 1870s that had been taken up again in the late 1950s. “We didn’t want to set the world on fire. We just wanted to eat,” said Khazan in a 2000 interview. The students debated the potential sites of their sit-in. Many came to mind, as most public places in Greensboro were segregated. They chose the F. W. Woolworth store, where African American patrons could shop and eat at a stand-up snack bar but were prohibited from eating at the lunch counter. The lunch counter staff itself was segregated: the waitresses were white; the food preparers and the cleaners, black. The store closed early, and the four students left peacefully, elated by their experience. “I can’t even describe it,” said McCain in a 2000 interview. “Never have I experienced such an incredible emotion, such an uplift.” That night they called together leaders of student groups to rally support for their cause. Many agreed to attend a sit-in the next day. More students joined the demonstration each day. Soon African American students from other colleges—and some white students—were participating. One week after the Greensboro protest began, African American students in Winston-Salem and Durham began sit-ins at local lunch counters. Demonstrations followed in Charlotte and Raleigh. By the end of the week, sit-ins had spread to other states in the South, and supporters of the movement were picketing Woolworth stores in the North. ? The Greensboro Woolworth’s finally desegregated its lunch counter on July 25, 1960, six months after the first sit-in. The first African Americans served were the lunch counter employees themselves. In the first week, three hundred African Americans were served; no one protested. ____________________________________________________________________________________ 1963: Birmingham Campaign"Project C" was the name given to the plan devised by Martin Luther King and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference to challenge the system of segregation in Birmingham, Alabama. The "C" in the project stood for confrontation, the strategy of nonviolent direct action designed to confront segregation through peaceful demonstrations, rallies, boycotts, and appeals to justice. This strategy actually hinged upon the anticipated reaction of Police Commissioner Bull Connor. Leaders reasoned that the response of Connor and the police would be to suppress the demonstrations, quite likely through violent means.? If so, this response to peaceful protest would attract national attention and create public sympathy for the cause of desegregation. The leaders reasoned correctly. The response of Bull Connor was as expected. Police dogs and fire hoses were used to disperse the demonstrators. Martin Luther King was arrested by Birmingham police. On May 2nd, Civil Rights leaders organized a Children’s March involving 6,000 black youngsters and teenagers, ranging in age from six to 16. On national television cameras, Birmingham police, followed the orders of police chief Eugene "Bull" Conner and let loose vicious police dogs on children as they knelt to pray. Police used fire hoses, dogs, and clubs against pregnant women, children, and the elderly. Over 900 children were arrested and jailed. Around the world, humanity was repulsed by the sickening spectacle. Images such as these encouraged President Kennedy and other federal officials to support federal action to end segregation. (Source: )Days into the Birmingham campaign, eight clergymen published an article criticizing the protest and King’s leadership. King read the opinion from his prison cell after a friend smuggled him a copy of the newspaper. In his famous “Letter from Birmingham Jail” – King defended his actions. Read the excerpts below:16 April 1963My Dear Fellow Clergymen:While confined here in the Birmingham city jail, I came across your recent statement calling my present activities "unwise and untimely." Seldom do I pause to answer criticism of my work and ideas. If I sought to answer all the criticisms that cross my desk, my secretaries would have little time for anything other than such correspondence in the course of the day, and I would have no time for constructive work. But since I feel that you are men of genuine good will and that your criticisms are sincerely set forth, I want to try to answer your statement in what I hope will be patient and reasonable terms… You deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations. I am sure that none of you would want to rest content with the superficial kind of social analysis that deals merely with effects and does not grapple with underlying causes. It is unfortunate that demonstrations are taking place in Birmingham, but it is even more unfortunate that the city's white power structure left the Negro community with no alternative…We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct action campaign that was "well timed" in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word "Wait!" It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This "Wait" has almost always meant "Never." We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that "justice too long delayed is justice denied."..We have waited for more than 340 years for our constitutional and God given rights. The nations of Asia and Africa are moving with jet-like speed toward gaining political independence, but we still creep at horse and buggy pace toward gaining a cup of coffee at a lunch counter. Perhaps it is easy for those who have never felt the stinging darts of segregation to say, "Wait." But when you have seen vicious mobs lynch your mothers and fathers at will and drown your sisters and brothers at whim; when you have seen hate filled policemen curse, kick and even kill your black brothers and sisters; when you see the vast majority of your twenty million Negro brothers smothering in an airtight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society; when you suddenly find your tongue twisted and your speech stammering as you seek to explain to your six year old daughter why she can't go to the public amusement park that has just been advertised on television, and see tears welling up in her eyes when she is told that Funtown is closed to colored children, and see ominous clouds of inferiority beginning to form in her little mental sky, and see her beginning to distort her personality by developing an unconscious bitterness toward white people; when you have to concoct an answer for a five year old son who is asking: "Daddy, why do white people treat colored people so mean?"; when you take a cross county drive and find it necessary to sleep night after night in the uncomfortable corners of your automobile because no motel will accept you; when you are humiliated day in and day out by nagging signs reading "white" and "colored"; when your first name becomes "nigger," your middle name becomes "boy" (however old you are) and your last name becomes "John," and your wife and mother are never given the respected title "Mrs."; when you are harried by day and haunted by night by the fact that you are a Negro, living constantly at tiptoe stance, never quite knowing what to expect next, and are plagued with inner fears and outer resentments; when you are forever fighting a degenerating sense of "nobodiness"--then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait. There comes a time when the cup of endurance runs over, and men are no longer willing to be plunged into the abyss of despair. I hope, sirs, you can understand our legitimate and unavoidable impatience. You express a great deal of anxiety over our willingness to break laws. This is certainly a legitimate concern. Since we so diligently urge people to obey the Supreme Court's decision of 1954 outlawing segregation in the public schools, at first glance it may seem rather paradoxical for us consciously to break laws. One may well ask: "How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?" The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that "an unjust law is no law at all."..Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever. The yearning for freedom eventually manifests itself, and that is what has happened to the American Negro. Something within has reminded him of his birthright of freedom, and something without has reminded him that it can be gained. Consciously or unconsciously, he has been caught up by the Zeitgeist, and with his black brothers of Africa and his brown and yellow brothers of Asia, South America and the Caribbean, the United States Negro is moving with a sense of great urgency toward the promised land of racial justice. If one recognizes this vital urge that has engulfed the Negro community, one should readily understand why public demonstrations are taking place. The Negro has many pent up resentments and latent frustrations, and he must release them. So let him march; let him make prayer pilgrimages to the city hall; let him go on freedom rides -and try to understand why he must do so. If his repressed emotions are not released in nonviolent ways, they will seek expression through violence; this is not a threat but a fact of history. So I have not said to my people: "Get rid of your discontent." Rather, I have tried to say that this normal and healthy discontent can be channeled into the creative outlet of nonviolent direct action. And now this approach is being termed extremist. But though I was initially disappointed at being categorized as an extremist, as I continued to think about the matter I gradually gained a measure of satisfaction from the label. Was not Jesus an extremist for love: "Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you." Was not Amos an extremist for justice: "Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like an ever flowing stream." Was not Paul an extremist for the Christian gospel: "I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus." Was not Martin Luther an extremist: "Here I stand; I cannot do otherwise, so help me God." And John Bunyan: "I will stay in jail to the end of my days before I make a butchery of my conscience." And Abraham Lincoln: "This nation cannot survive half slave and half free." And Thomas Jefferson: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal . . ." So the question is not whether we will be extremists, but what kind of extremists we will be. Will we be extremists for hate or for love? Will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice or for the extension of justice? In that dramatic scene on Calvary's hill three men were crucified. We must never forget that all three were crucified for the same crime--the crime of extremism. Two were extremists for immorality, and thus fell below their environment. The other, Jesus Christ, was an extremist for love, truth and goodness, and thereby rose above his environment. Perhaps the South, the nation and the world are in dire need of creative extremists.1963: March on WashingtonIn order to pressure the federal government (Congress) to support a civil rights bill proposed by President Kennedy, Civil Rights leaders, including Martin Luther King, CORE, SNCC, decided to revive A Philip Randolph’s idea of a 1941 March on Washington Movement. The result was a biracial audience of over 250,00 peaceful demonstrators who marched through Washington, D.C., and gathered before the Lincoln Memorial for speeches, songs and prayer, most notably for Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech, on August 28th 1963. According to most historians, this represents the “high tide” of the Civil Rights Movement. Although President Kennedy was assassinated in November of that year, President Johnson led Congress to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which outlawed segregation and discrimination in public facilities, government, and employment based on race and gender. Although Southern Senators tried to block passage of the bill by launching a 54 day filibuster to prevent its passage, the bill ultimately became law. 1964: Freedom Summer In the summer of 1964, college students and others throughout the United States were invited to Mississippi to take part in what was then called the Mississippi Summer Project, now known as “Freedom Summer” to register black voters throughout the South. Even though the 15th Amendment guaranteed black suffrage, by 1962 less than 7 percent of the black electorate were registered to vote in Mississippi. On June 4, 1964, three civil rights workers connected with the voter registration project went missing. James Earl Chaney, born in Meridian, Mississippi in 1943, joined CORE at the age of twenty. He became involved in the mobilization of the 1964 Freedom Summer with white activists such as Andrew Goodman and Michael Schwerner, a 24-year-old Cornell University graduate who had just opened the CORE office in Meridian with his wife Rita. On June 21, 1964, Chaney, Schwerner, and Goodman were driving from Meridian to Lawndale, Mississippi, when the police stopped them in Philadelphia, Mississippi, for speeding. They were taken to jail but were subsequently released--only to disappear. For six weeks nothing was heard of them.It was not until August 4 that their decomposed bodies were uncovered beneath an earthen dam. The autopsy revealed that Goodman and Schwerner had been killed by single gunshots to the head. Chaney had been brutally beaten before being shot. The Justice Department subsequently indicted 19 people, including police officers and members of the Ku Klux Klan for their involvement in the murders. Only seven of those indicted were found guilty. The case raised new support for the civil rights cause as a result of the death of two young white men. Individuals who did not know that violence could touch the white community were shocked at the brutality of the killings, and thus widespread support began to pour in for the Mississippi group. The search for their bodies, however, revealed a bitter irony – it took white Northern victims to ensure national attention and investigation. (Source: )1965: Selma March To pressure the federal government to enforce the voting rights of African American in the South, SNCC and MLK’s organization – the SCLC – organized a march for the right to vote. This plan entailed walking along the highway from Selma, Alabama to the state capital of Montogmery, 50 miles away. As marchers crossed the Edmund Pettus Bridge along the route, the police, armed with shotguns and automatic weapons, confronted the marchers. The Alabama troopers, determined to stop the marchers, pressed forward in readiness to attack. Governor George Wallace had approved the use of force, if necessary, to halt the march. What ensued was a brutal and sickening attack by police with tear gas, billy clubs and night sticks on the unarmed marchers. More than 600 marchers were assaulted and 17 hospitalized on the first day of the march, known as "Bloody Sunday."Martin Luther King returned to Selma on Tuesday, March 9, to personally lead 1,500 nonviolent marchers and confront the Alabama State troopers on the other side of the bridge. After kneeling to pray and singing the civil rights anthem, "We Shall Overcome," King ordered the marchers to turn back. He believed that the use of force by the police was imminent and that the symbolic point of walking across the bridge had been made. King's decision disappointed, if not angered, SNCC activists, and even some of the SCLC leadership. Later that evening, white racists attacked several white ministers who had participated in the march. A Unitarian minister, clubbed in the head, died of his injuries two days later. Despite the violence the marchers encountered on two occasions, King and the SCLC courageously planned a third march. After the federal court ruled that Alabama could not prohibit the marches, the march began on March 21. By the time they arrived in Montgomery, the 4,000 who had begun the march in Selma had been joined by more than 25,000 additional marchers. As they reached the state capitol building, which still flew the Confederate battle flag, tens of thousands of marchers celebrated their victory.The violence in Selma compelled President Johnson to propose that Congress pass The Voting Rights Act of 1965, which outlawed literacy tests and sent federal registrars into the South to register black voters. In four years, in every Southern state, the percentage of black adults registered to vote rose above 60 percent. 1966: March Against Fear & the Rise of Black Power Aubrey James Norvell made it plain: "I just want James Meredith.” In the summer of 1966, Meredith, who had been the first black student admitted to the University of Mississippi, began a walk from Memphis, Tennessee to Jackson, Mississippi to encourage blacks to register to vote. With three blasts of a shotgun, Norvell, an unemployed white man from Memphis, wounded Meredith and transformed what had been a quixotic, lonely walk into a significant march for the civil rights movement. A photograph of a wounded James Meredith, writhing in pain, won photographer Jack Thornell the Pulitizer Prize. (Source: old.)As others took up the "March Against Fear," organizers debated the inclusion of whites in the protest and the carrying of weapons in defense of a nonviolent movement. This moment is seen to be the birth of Black Power! an ideology and a movement that articulated the desire for blacks to control the political and economic resources of their communities and rely on their own efforts rather than working with whites (even in Civil Rights protests). Although Malclom X articulated a similar vision, the idea of Black Power did not develop into a movement until after the March Against Fear. Stokley Carmichael, President of SNCC, formerly a non-violent, integrationist organization, began to lead a new movement of increasingly disillusioned black Americans to fight for Black Power. While black power or black nationalist-inspired organizations sprung up all over the United States, perhaps most infamous of the groups was the Black Panther Party. In October 1966, two student activists, Huey P. Newton and Bobby Seale, founded the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense in Oakland, California. The original purpose of the party was to create a security force to protect black residents from the local police. The Ten-Point Program of The Black Panther Party (BPP) included demands for full employment, decent housing, education for all, an end to police brutality, and the liberation of black men imprisoned in federal and state penitentiaries. Significantly, the tenth point in the BPP's program demanded: "Land, bread, housing, education, clothing, justice and peace. And as our major political objective, a United Nations-supervised plebiscite to be held throughout the black colony in which only black colonial subjects will be allowed to participate, for the purpose of determining the will of black people as to their national destiny."In May 1967, BPP co-founder Bobby Seale, and a group of party members marched into the California State Capitol building, fully armed, to read a protest statement. The police immediately arrested all 30 Panthers in the demonstration, and the BPP became the target of extensive surveillance and disruption from the FBI and local law enforcement agencies.FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover referred to the BPP as "the greatest threat to the internal security of the country." In 1967, when Fred Hampton was only 19 years old, the FBI established a file on him that would soon amount to thousands of pages. In early 1968, Hampton's mother's telephone was wiretapped. An FBI counterintelligence operative, William O'Neal, joined the Chicago chapter of the BPP, and convinced others to let him serve as the group's chief of security. Hampton was murdered in his sleep by police in a raid on his apartment in 1969. In 1969 alone, 27 Panthers were killed by the police and 749 were jailed throughout the country.By late 1968, the Panthers had come under such overt police assault throughout the country that the party retreated from some of its more extreme positions and began to emphasize the construction of social welfare programs for the most disadvantaged members of the black community. In January 1969, the BPP initiated the free breakfast program for school children. By the end of that year, over 10,000 children of low-income families were being fed daily by the party. In several cities, the Panthers provided free legal services and health care facilities, and the organization increased its popular following among black working class and poor people, and particularly among young people.Through the FBI's counterintelligence program, federal agents worked closely with state and local law enforcement officials to watch, arrest, imprison, and, in several instances, to assassinate, Black Panther and other black nationalist leaders and members. Similar tactics of surveillance had been applied to Malcolm X, and Martin Luther King Jr. Black Power groups began to be dismantled as organizational stability was weakened by surveillance, infiltration, and raids by federal and local police agents. Yet the tenets of the Black Power movement continue to inform people's individual identity and notion of black solidarity to this day.(Source: , )1968: Assassination of Martin Luther King, JrOn April 4, 1968, the world was stunned and saddened by the news that the civil rights activist and Nobel Peace Prize winner Martin Luther King Jr. had been shot and killed on the balcony of a motel in Memphis, Tennessee, where he had gone to support a sanitation workers' strike. King's death opened a huge rift between white and black Americans, as many blacks saw the killing as a rejection of their vigorous pursuit of equality through the nonviolent resistance he had championed. In more than 100 cities, several days of riots, burning and looting followed his death. The accused killer, a white man named James Earl Ray, was captured and tried immediately; he entered a guilty plea and was sentenced to 99 years in prison; no testimony was heard. Ray later recanted his confession, and despite several inquiries into the matter by the U.S. government, many continued to believe that the speedy trial had been a cover–up for a larger conspiracy. King's assassination, along with the killing of Malcolm X three years earlier, radicalized many moderate African American activists, fueling the growth of the Black Power movement and the Black Panther Party. The success of conservative politicians that year—including Richard Nixon's election as president and the third–party candidacy of the ardent segregationist George Wallace, who won 13 percent of the vote—further discouraged African Americans, many of whom felt that the tide was turning against the civil rights movement. 1968: The Fair Housing ActOne week after King’s assassination, President Johnson signed into law the last major piece of civil rights legislation. The purpose of the law was to increase minority Americans’ access to housing. The act outlaws the refusal to rent or sell property to people who fall within a protected class. ____________________________________________________________________________________________1968: Black Power at the OlympicsIt was the most popular medal ceremony of all time. The photographs of two black American sprinters standing on the medal podium with heads bowed and fists raised at the Mexico City Games in 1968 not only represent one of the most memorable moments in Olympic history but a milestone in America's Civil Rights Movement. The two men were Tommie Smith and John Carlos. Teammates at San Jose State University, Smith and Carlos were stirred by the suggestion of a young sociologist friend Harry Edwards, who asked them and all the other black American athletes to join together and boycott the games. The protest, Edwards hoped, would bring attention to the fact that America's civil rights movement had not gone far enough to eliminate the injustices black Americans were facing. -381014541500In the 200-meter race, Smith won the gold medal and Carlos the bronze. As the American flag rose and the Star Spangled Banner played, the two closed their eyes, bowed their heads, and began their protest. Smith later told the media that he raised his right, black-glove-covered fist in the air to represent black power in America while Carlos' left, black-covered fist represented unity in black America. Together they formed an arch of unity and power. While the protest seems relatively tame by today's standards, the actions of Smith and Carlos were met with such outrage that they were suspended from their national team and banned from the Olympic Village, the athletes' home during the games.A lot of people thought that political statements had no place in the supposedly apolitical Olympic Games. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download