PDA

View Full Version : How would Martin Luther King Jr. react to NSA spying today?




devil21
08-26-2013, 02:31 AM
With the coverage of the March, I have to wonder what MLK would have to say about NSA spying. He was a Republican, you know.

http://wondrouspics.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/mlk0031.jpg

I don't see many MLK meme pics with conservative messages.

robert68
08-26-2013, 02:35 AM
He was a Republican, you know...




How so?

To the question, don't know, but Malcolm X certainly would condemn it.

devil21
08-26-2013, 02:42 AM
Would he say?

"I have a dream that one day right there in Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers and declare that none of us want to be spied on by the government, regardless of the color of our skin."

Something like that?

alucard13mm
08-26-2013, 02:54 AM
Id be more curious about what hed think about tratvon martin.

RM918
08-26-2013, 05:01 AM
The depressing thing is that no matter what he said, he'd likely not be taken very seriously. In being murdered he became a martyr, and what he did and said became far more important than if he was still alive. I'd bet Sharpton would dismiss him an a washed out crank.

KEEF
08-26-2013, 07:07 AM
MLK and Malcolm X would both condemn it, but then MSM (the so called 'conservative' side) would spin their comments as race baiting. The people would be distracted by race then...end of story. :D

donnay
08-26-2013, 08:32 AM
"I had a nightmare..."

acptulsa
08-26-2013, 08:54 AM
He would have fewer meetings inside, and more in the open air.


He was a Republican, you know.

I don't see many MLK meme pics with conservative messages.


How so?

For most of the first hundred years since the Civil War, most blacks were Republicans. The Democratic Party started the Civil War, the Democratic Party was the party of the southern states, and few southern whites wanted to vote for the party of Lincoln. What's more, yellow dog Democrats were more 'conservative' (as the term is misused today) than any Republicans back then.

Paulbot99
08-26-2013, 11:16 AM
Considering he was spied on by the FBI, he might take this rather seriously...

robert68
08-26-2013, 11:36 AM
For most of the first hundred years since the Civil War, most blacks were Republicans. The Democratic Party started the Civil War, the Democratic Party was the party of the southern states, and few southern whites wanted to vote for the party of Lincoln. What's more, yellow dog Democrats were more 'conservative' (as the term is misused today) than any Republicans back then.

None of that means he was a Republican. The Democrat Party had changed a lot by the time of MLK's political adulthood. JFK and LBJ's support of new civil rights laws was significant in that regard.

LibertyEagle
08-26-2013, 11:40 AM
With the coverage of the March, I have to wonder what MLK would have to say about NSA spying. He was a Republican, you know.

I don't see many MLK meme pics with conservative messages.

Probably because he was at the very least, a communist-sympathizer.

Anti Federalist
08-26-2013, 12:05 PM
"I had a nightmare..."

Wins thread.

mosquitobite
08-28-2013, 06:41 AM
http://www.aavw.org/special_features/speeches_speech_king02.html

He actually did say something on it:

A fifth casualty of the war in Vietnam is the principle of dissent. An ugly repressive sentiment to silence peace seekers depicts advocates of immediate negotiation and persons who call for a cessation of bombings in the north as quasi-traitors, fools and venal enemies of our soldiers and institutions. When those who stand for peace are so vilified it is time to consider where we are going and whether free speech has not become one of the major casualties of the war.

Curtailment of free speech is rationalized on grounds that American tradition forbids criticism of our government when the nation is at war. More than a century ago when we were in a declared state of war with Mexico, a first term Congressman by the name of Abraham Lincoln stood in the halls of Congress and fearlessly and scathingly denounced that war. Abraham Lincoln of Illinois had not heard of this tradition or he was not inclined to respect it. Nor had Thoreau and Emerson and many other philosophers who shaped our democratic traditions.


Also applicable to Syria:

The second casualty of the war in Vietnam is the principle of self-determination. By entering a war that is little more than a domestic civil war, America has ended up supporting a new form of colonialism covered up by certain niceties of complexity. Whether we realize it or not our participation in the war in Vietnam is an ominous expression of our lack of sympathy for the oppressed, our paranoid anti-Communism, our failure to feel the ache and anguish of the Have Nots. It reveals our willingness to continue participating in neo-colonialist adventures.

A brief look at the back ground and history of this war reveals with brutal clarity the ugliness of our policy. The Vietnamese people proclaimed their own independence in 1945 after a combined French and Japanese occupation, and before the Communist revolution in China. They were led by the now well known Ho Chi Minh. Even though they quoted the American Declaration of Independence in their own document of freedom, we refused to recognize them. Instead, we decided to support France in its reconquest of her former colony. With that tragic decision we rejected a revolutionary government seeking self-determination, and a government that had been established not by China, for whom the Vietnamese have no great love, but by clearly indigenous forces that included some Communists.

For nine years following 1945 we denied the people of Vietnam the right to independence. For nine years we financially supported the French in their abortive effort to re-colonize Vietnam. Before the end of the war we were meeting 80% of the French war costs. Even before the French were defeated at Dien Bien Phu, they began to despair of their reckless action, but we did not. We encouraged them with our huge financial and military supplies to continue the war even after they had lost the will.

When a negotiated settlement of the war was reached in 1954, through the Geneva Accord, it was done against our will. After doing all that we could to sabotage the planning for the Geneva Accord, we finally refused to sign it.

Soon after this we helped install Ngo Dhim Diem. We supported him in his betrayal of the Geneva Accord and his refusal to have the promised 1956 elections. We watched with approval as he engaged in ruthless and bloody persecution of all opposition forces. When Diem's infamous actions finally led to the formation of The National Liberation Front, the American public was duped into believing that the civil rebellion was being waged by puppets from Hanoi. As Douglas Pike wrote: "In horror, Americans helplessly watched Diem tear apart the fabric of Vietnamese society more effectively than the Communists had ever been able to do it. It was the most efficient act of his entire career."

Since Diem's death we have actively supported military dictatorships all in the name of fighting for freedom. When it became evident that these regimes could not defeat the Vietcong, we began to steadily increase our forces, calling them 'military advisors' rather than fighting soldiers.

Today we are fighting an all-out war, undeclared by Congress. We have well over 500,000 American servicemen fighting in that benighted and unhappy country. American planes based in other countries are bombing the territory of their neighbor.

The greatest irony and tragedy of all is that our nation, which initiated so much of the revolutionary spirit of the modern world, is now cast in the mold of being an arch anti-revolutionary. We are engaged in a war that seeks to turn the clock of history back and perpetuate white colonialism.

UtahApocalypse
08-28-2013, 07:16 AM
Wonder what he would think of today's blacks.....

Danke
08-28-2013, 07:51 AM
Or more importantly, what would his main speechwriter, Stanley Levison, think...

donnay
08-28-2013, 09:49 AM
Or more importantly, what would his main speechwriter, Stanley Levison, think...

"Oy Vey what a nightmare I had..."