The first 'anecdote' says that there was bad communication between Pam Africa and IAC about some tour. Maybe there was, who knows. Why is this a "dirty trick"? Who is it on? More importantly, do you think for a second that Pam Africa would back up whoever-this-is in your general attack on the IAC?
The second 'anecdote' is from three years ago and says that IAC disagreed with whoever-this-is about Woodfox's defense, and that this was because the IAC had a speaking tour planned. I have no idea what the defense has to do with the tour. Are you claiming that the IAC plotted to keep Woodfox locked in prison for the convenience of a speaking tour? That's pretty scandalous, Chuck0. Does Woodfox agree with your charges? Does King Wilkerson agree with your charges? Here is what he said this year when he got out.
http://www.workers.org/ww/2001/wilker0510.html
But why go this route? These defense campaigns are serious life-and-death business, and you want to drag Pam Africa and Woodfox into the middle of your little squabble with the IAC? Woodfox is still in prison, and you want to air accounts of disputes about his defense on the internet for everyone to see including the Louisiana Attorney General, with no idea if Woodfox wants you to do that or not, for your own political purposes.
lp