How the Civil Rights Act of 1964 chan...

How the Civil Rights Act of 1964 changed America

There are 144 comments on the San Gabriel Valley Tribune story from Jul 1, 2014, titled How the Civil Rights Act of 1964 changed America. In it, San Gabriel Valley Tribune reports that:

When Earl Ofari-Hutchinson watched President Lyndon B. Johnson sign the historic Civil Rights Act on television five decades ago, something inside him stirred.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at San Gabriel Valley Tribune.

Since: Aug 09

Minneapolis, MN

#137 Jul 20, 2014
WRONG wrote:
<quoted text>
NO! All world religions! I see how stupid you are.
Somehow, you seem to managed to skip over Islam. Did you sleep through Islamic Studies and Islamic Jurisprudence?

Since: Aug 09

Minneapolis, MN

#138 Jul 20, 2014
I know quite well that you know nothing about Islamic history. But that is okay. It is my intention to give you your first lesson in Islamic history before the cock crows.

Since: Aug 09

Minneapolis, MN

#139 Jul 20, 2014
Okay, brothers and sisters, friends and enemies, let us move on to Islamic History.

Who was Bilal? His full name was Bilal ibn Rabah. The place where I usually Pray is called Masjid Bilal ibn Rabah. So obviously, Bilal was an important personality in Islamic history. In fact, he was a close friend and companion of Holy Prophet Muhammad (Sal Alayhi wa Salam)

But at the time that the ]verses I referred to above were Revealed to Muhammad, Bilal was a slave. So nobody denies that the pagan Arabs owned slaves and lots of them. However, when Bilal learned what had happened to Muhammad, he Believed that Muhammad was A True Prophet. And by Believing, he became one of the first Muslims in the community at Mecca.

Bilal was a black African who had been enslaved in Mecca by the pagans, including the Christians and the Jews of that time. But when he became a Muslim, the Muslims immediately bought him out of slavery. See, we did not start any civil war and kill a bunch of [people trying to end slavery. We simply paid for the slaves. And Bilal became a freed man and got married etc. Obviously somebody forgot to castrate him.

When the question arose as to how to call the Believers together for Congregational Prayer, there were several ideas floating around. One was to get a bell like the Christians had. But how could Believers distinguish from a Christian bell and a Muslim bell? It was Bilal was suggested using the human voice. And these are the Words he used, translated into English:

GOD is Great!!!
GOD is Great!!!

GOD is Great!!!
GOD is Great!!!

I bear witness that there is no deity worthy of worship but GOD!!!
I bear witness that there is no deity worthy of worship but GOD!!!

I bear witness that Muhammad is a Prophet of GOD!!!
I bear witness that Muhammad is a Prophet of GOD!!!

Come to Prayer!!!
Come to Prayer!!!

Come to Success!!!
Come to Success!!!

GOD is Great!!!
GOD is Great!!!

There is no deity worthy of worship but GOD!!!

Bilal, like many African singers, had a very beautiful voice. And Islam all over the world came to be associated with the sound of those words Five Times a Day all over the Muslim world to this day. It is said that the last time that Bilal shouted those words in the City of Mecca, people came forth crying.

But he was certainly not the only African at the foundation of the Islamic Movement. I have already proven that all Arabs trace their ancestry back to Egypt through Holy Prophetess Hagar. Thus every Arab is part black, part African. Bilal was one of many Africans laves who became heroes in Mecca in those early days of Islam. I believe that Muhammad was also one.(See The Great Prophet Muhammad and his Famous Black Companions by abu Bakr: http://www.amazon.com/Great-Prophet-Mohammed-... )

Brother Muhammad abu Bakr traces Muhammad's ancestry all the way back to Prophet Abraham (Sal Alayhi wa Salam) and ultimately back to Adam and Eve (Sal Alayhi wa Salam) But there is more to this story than mere skin color or race. Monotheism came from Adam and Eve through Egypt down to Muhmmad.

Above I spoke about Surah 96 and how it related to slavery. But the First Five Verses are as follows. GOD said to Muhammad:

"96:1: Recite in the name of your Lord who created -
"96:2: Created man from a clinging substance.
"96:3: Recite, and your Lord is the most Generous -
"96:4: Who taught by the pen -
"96:5: Taught man that which he knew not."

First, Muhammad saw the image of the Angel Gabriel appear before. When Gabriel said "Read" Muhammad said, "I cannot read".

So lets ask the question Why could Muhammad not read? It is because his parents both died when he was about 6 years old. So nobody took enough interest in him to educate him in any way. That was the pagan Arabs and Christians and Jews of that time. Nobody has any time for him. So, they gave him to an African slave girl. She raised him as her son and taught him Monotheism. That is why he was in that cave praying like a slave.

Since: Aug 09

Minneapolis, MN

#140 Jul 20, 2014
Slaves were not allowed to Pray. They were too busy working to Pray. Praying to GOD was a luxury reserved for rich people. If we study American slavery, we learn that after long hard days of back breaking work, the slaves would sneak off into the wilderness and caves to Pray. the slave master did not tolerate Prayer. "Seeth thous one who forbids a slave when he Prayeth?" This is Prophesy that predicted the enslavement of Africans in the Americas. So Muhammad had to live as if he was a slave. And his enslaved foster mother taught him Monotheism from Africa. Thus, he grew up to be a man who would sneak out of town and Pray in a cave. This is how Islamic HISTORY BEGINS. Islamic history 101, Lesson 1.

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#141 Jul 20, 2014
Muslim & Christian Slave trades

Probably the mortality rate in the Atlantic slave trade was greater than the4 10% indicated by Wrong. Bu the bottom line is that MILLIONS of African lives were lost to both the Muslim and Christian slave trades.

However, we're supposed to be taling about the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#142 Jul 20, 2014
Abdurratln wrote:
<quoted text>
We prefer liberty in poverty to riches in slavery. Google that one
<quoted text>
Have you ever heard of economic blockade by Uncle Sam? Well, you can imagine how alarmed the white man was when he heard that "negroes" were acting uppity. So perverts like Thomas Jefferson slapped a whole load of economic sanctions against the Freedom Fighters of Haiti. And we are still suffering from them.
<quoted text>
That's another racist lie. It was economic warfare because they could not win on the battlefield, they resorted to the economic arena in an attempt to re-enslave the Haitians. They did the same thing against my own political movement when we freed Guinea from France. They took everything they could take when we kicked them out. They even took light bulbs out of the sockets. In Zimbabwe they stooped so low as to pore cement into water wells so that we could not even get drinking water. That is how angry the white man gets when you tell him that he has been a bad master. LOOOOL!!!
<quoted text>
I just answered you partially above before you could even raise that stupid issue.
With regard to Haiti, you finally make correct observations. The economic retributions against Haiti by both France and the USA played a pivotal role in the impoverishment of the country. However, this is not to deny the corrupt leadership one also found there. But there has been a bit of research on how Haiti was punished, economically sabotaged for the crime of launching the only successful slave revolt in history.
Toussaint l'Ouverture ought to be at least as familiar a name as Spartacus.

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#143 Jul 20, 2014
WRONG wrote:
Let's talk about the Haitian Revolution! The only time in the history of the world slaves rebelled successfully. How did that actually turn out? Haiti is the second poorest nation on the planet; running a close second to Afghanistan! Afghanistan has nothing in the form of a GDP, however Haiti has plentiful resources. Why is Haiti so poor? Corrupt Black Leadership, and a Lazy Black Population! It's that simple, laying back and smoking pot is far easier than doing something with what you have. In America Dr. Kings Dream has been destroyed, by the very people he gave his life to help, you are one of those people! Ignorance is you're God.
's no lazy Black population in Haiti, and there's no nation known to man in which the population as a whole does little or nothing more than smoke pot.
As for Dr. King's dream, which is invoked more readily than understood or examined, it consisted of a lot more than some vision of "the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slaveowners" sitting together at the table of brotherhood.
If you examine King's thought in some depth you will see that it involved something more than just desegregations. It also involved an idea of a cooperative economic commonwealth and a community and nation governed by a "person-oriented" value system rather than a "thing-oriented" value system. It involved the ending of both class and race injustices and divisions. It entailed economic democracy as well as political democracy; and it involved a moving away from that deeply held American prejudice in favor of "rugged individualism." For King there is no "I" with out "thou." Or as King put it in WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE, "The self cannot be a self without other selves...All men are interdependent." His visionis that of "person-in-community " to use the words of Rfus Burrows. And the ultimate aim of King was the "beloved community."
Black people didn't destroy the dream of Dr. King. American simply failed to live up to the noble vision of King. She has yet to prove to be equal to the radical vision of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#144 Jul 20, 2014
It is important to understand that for King desegregation--which he distinguishes from integration--is not the ultimate aim. His aim is a new social order--Ultimately, the end is "the creation of the beloved community." This entails a "mutually cooperative and voluntary venture." While it does involved the transcendence of capitalism, of possessive individualism while leaning toward a cooperative society, it must not be confused with what people normally think of when they speak of "communism" (as in the USSR, etc). It is not a coercive collectivism, which is actually irrelevant to community if not the actual negation of it. When King speak of a "voluntary and cooperative venture," he means precisely that. No commissars, no bureaucrats, and no Wall Street pirates. A cooperative society, a free association in which the human person in relations with his/her fellows is able to flourish as human personalities.
The attack on segregation was a step in that direction, but not final aim. One might say that desegregation is a negative good, i.e., the removal of an evil. The achievement of a positive good entails a fuller transformation of society and a "revolution of values."

Since: Aug 09

Minneapolis, MN

#145 Jul 20, 2014
Savant wrote:
Muslim & Christian Slave trades
Probably the mortality rate in the Atlantic slave trade was greater than the4 10% indicated by Wrong. Bu the bottom line is that MILLIONS of African lives were lost to both the Muslim and Christian slave trades.
However, we're supposed to be taling about the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Showus your evidenceotSTFU. I do not need lying racist apartheid South African Jews to teach me any African history. But if you have any credible evidence at all, I will consider it.

Since: Aug 09

Minneapolis, MN

#146 Jul 21, 2014
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>'s no lazy Black population in Haiti, and there's no nation known to man in which the population as a whole does little or nothing more than smoke pot.
As for Dr. King's dream, which is invoked more readily than understood or examined, it consisted of a lot more than some vision of "the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slaveowners" sitting together at the table of brotherhood.
Man, how can you be so nutty? Those are MLK's own words. So we can be certain that that is what it "consists of". You slant to it, and interpretation of is what YOU "consist of", not what MLK "consists of". As long as ti stick closely to MLK's own words of paraphrase therefrom, we are cool. But when you put words into MLK's mouth, you ar3e doing nothing but lying. By now, you ought to have developed sound methodology, especially since you claim to have had a lot of contact to revolutionary thought methods. I do not care how many times you pisss on the sidewalk at an "occupy", you still seem wet behind the ears at best. You do not use any type of scientific or recognizable revolutionary methodology. That alone set you aside from MLK.

I do not know the details of MLK's education. But I do know that he was well versed in the clearest thought of his times. For all of his faults, he never attributed words to Gandhi, for example, that Gandhi never said. And I think he struggled hard to inculcate Gandhism in his own life. Thus, he was more concerned with the underlying principles behind Gandhi than Gandhi's exact words. Thus, he always remained true to Christianity and never converted to Hinduism. But based on what MLK himself said about his own thinking, I think we have to take a close and serious look at Gandhi to understand MLK. And, clearly Mahatma Gandhi has had a huge impact on the African Revolution.
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>If you examine King's thought in some depth you will see that it involved something more than just desegregations. It also involved an idea of a cooperative economic commonwealth and a community and nation governed by a "person-oriented" value system rather than a "thing-oriented" value system.
That is Gandhian.

Savant wrote:
<quoted text>It involved the ending of both class and race injustices and divisions.
That is not Gandhian. You have now drifted off into the theory of Marxian class struggle. I do not believe that that was what MLK was about. True, he wanted to end poverty as did Gandhi. But nowhere in either Gandhi or MLK do we see and evidence that he wanted to "end both race and class divisions". That simple is not true.

Gandhi wanted to reclaim Hindu values by returning to the traditional Hindu culture and economics. Thus, we most often see Gandhi sitting at the spinning wheel.( http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_nJLOuss1ip0/S80Iczd... ). He was a trained lawyer who could earned huge amounts of money by practicing law. Instead, he set an example for the poorest Hindu by showing them how to defeat British colonialism which was based on control of the textile industry which had in turn destroyed Indian textile manufacturing because they could not compete with cheap British machine made products. So Gandhi showed his people how to free themselves by boycotting British textiles and making their own homespun textiles. To this day, Indian industries is based largely on their ability to control their own textile manufacturing. For example, I often wear Asian style Islamic attire. This contributes to Indian economics rather than the white man controlled economies. I do this very consciously.

Continued below...

Since: Aug 09

Minneapolis, MN

#147 Jul 21, 2014
Continued from above…

Unfortunately, MLK died before he was able to articulate and clear and coherent economic theory. He was sympathetic to the union workers. That may very well have led him into the folly of bowing down to the teacher’s union at the expense of school children. We do not know. We do know that since his death, unions have lost a great deal of their previous power. So where is all that going? Nobody knows for sure. And nobody knows for sure where MLK was headed in terms of economics. We do know that his successors are far from solving the economic problem. Resurrection City did not work. But occupy just had to repeat an unworkable folly. Maybe they did it to try to figure out why it did not. But You, Savant, are stuck on stupid. You are fishing in a hole that has no fish in it. So you want to seed it with your own little minnows. I won’t buy it.
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>It entailed economic democracy as well as political democracy; and it involved a moving away from that deeply held American prejudice in favor of "rugged individualism."
What? You crazy.

Savant wrote:
<quoted text>For King there is no "I" with out "thou." Or as King put it in WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE, "The self cannot be a self without other selves...All men are interdependent." His visionis that of "person-in-community " to use the words of Rfus Burrows. And the ultimate aim of King was the "beloved community."
Nice rhetoric that means absolutely nothing beyond the sentimental love that we all had for MLK.
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>Black people didn't destroy the dream of Dr. King. American simply failed to live up to the noble vision of King. She has yet to prove to be equal to the radical vision of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Ultimately, though, MLK was an idealist. I do not know if he had one ounce of realism in him. But in order to solve the problem of the African, I think we must begin with realism and base ourselves in the concrete facts of history. But you bring some stupid garbage to us from a lying zionist from South Africa who probably never uttered one word against apartheid. At the same time you want us to think you were anti-Apartheid. Well, for me, you still have to prove you are anti-Apartheid. And you can begin by being anti-zionist right now as israel attempts genocide against the defenseless people of Gaza.( http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/2009/0... ) Where is you protest, your boycott of Zionism? We have been trying to organize a boycott of zionism since apartheid came down. Where have you been? You have been somewhere making up lies about MLK.

Since: Jul 08

Location hidden

#148 Jul 21, 2014
Savant wrote:
<quoted text> With regard to Haiti, you finally make correct observations. The economic retributions against Haiti by both France and the USA played a pivotal role in the impoverishment of the country. However, this is not to deny the corrupt leadership one also found there. But there has been a bit of research on how Haiti was punished, economically sabotaged for the crime of launching the only successful slave revolt in history.
Toussaint l'Ouverture ought to be at least as familiar a name as Spartacus.
But we bombed Japan and then held that country under our influence and look at them. Might there be some other factor responsible for the econmic situation in Haiti other than retributions by France, and the US, and corrupt leadership? Serious question dude. Don't be cowardly and try to side step it.

“sly as a fox”

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#149 Jul 21, 2014
Spock Adams Mathers wrote:
<quoted text>
But we bombed Japan and then held that country under our influence and look at them. Might there be some other factor responsible for the econmic situation in Haiti other than retributions by France, and the US, and corrupt leadership? Serious question dude. Don't be cowardly and try to side step it.
For any country or nation to be economically stable they must have some form of industry without industry no country can survive. There's corruption in every government which includes USA probably more here than anywhere so corruption is not assigned to a particular nation or group.

Since: Aug 09

Minneapolis, MN

#150 Jul 21, 2014
Speaking of an economic theory to be attributed to MLK, he did not leave one. Anybody who claims that he did is a liar. But we can use what he left as a guide to try to figure out what he might have done or said.

We know MLK sought to pattern his own life after that of Mahatma Gandhi. What I have never heard anyone say, however, is that in nearly every picture of Gandhi that we see, he is sitting at the spinning wheel manufacturing his own cloth to make his own clothes: http://cdn.ndtv.com/tech/gadget/image/gandhi-... . The idea was to have his people to stop buying cloth from the white man that had been manufactured by white workers. That is an economic principle that we in Africa can learn from.

But Gandhi was not simply negative and destructive. He was positive and constructive. While was destroying the economic power of the colonial power, he was also building up the economic power of his own people. What so-called has developed programs to make Africans economically power other the we Black Power people and pan-Africanists such as Kwame Nkrumah and Marcus Garvey? Do not be afraid to say that Garvey started the Black Star Line. Booker T. Washington built Tuskegee University and the National Negro Business League. But clowns like Savant never mention these facts.

All I am really trying to say is that we must be about building up economic structures and institutions within the African Nation, just as Gandhi taught India to do. Nehru led India to use socialist principles to organize Indian industry. Gandhi was not a socialist just as MLK was not one. But when we study Gandhi we learn that which can point us in the direction of socialism. If we study MLK he will point us towards Gandhi. And Gandhi will point us towards Nehru and Nkrumah, etc.

Let us not be stuck on stupid trying to find MLK saying something he did not say. Let's move beyond that and go where he never went but was nonetheless wise enough to point us in that direction. We ought to be studying what Nkrumah did in Ghana ( http://conventionpeoplesparty.org/... ) and Nehru did in India. But most of us have no idea who Nehru was, nor for that matter, who Nkrumah was. Savant have no clear idea about Nkrumah simply because he does not know anything about Nkrumah.

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#151 Jul 21, 2014
Spock Adams Mathers wrote:
<quoted text>
But we bombed Japan and then held that country under our influence and look at them. Might there be some other factor responsible for the econmic situation in Haiti other than retributions by France, and the US, and corrupt leadership? Serious question dude. Don't be cowardly and try to side step it.
The USA economically reconstructed Japan as well as Europe. There was no Marshall Plan for Haiti. Only economic reprisals

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#152 Jul 21, 2014
Abdurratln wrote:
Speaking of an economic theory to be attributed to MLK, he did not leave one. Anybody who claims that he did is a liar. But we can use what he left as a guide to try to figure out what he might have done or said.
We know MLK sought to pattern his own life after that of Mahatma Gandhi. What I have never heard anyone say, however, is that in nearly every picture of Gandhi that we see, he is sitting at the spinning wheel manufacturing his own cloth to make his own clothes: http://cdn.ndtv.com/tech/gadget/image/gandhi-... . The idea was to have his people to stop buying cloth from the white man that had been manufactured by white workers. That is an economic principle that we in Africa can learn from.
But Gandhi was not simply negative and destructive. He was positive and constructive. While was destroying the economic power of the colonial power, he was also building up the economic power of his own people. What so-called has developed programs to make Africans economically power other the we Black Power people and pan-Africanists such as Kwame Nkrumah and Marcus Garvey? Do not be afraid to say that Garvey started the Black Star Line. Booker T. Washington built Tuskegee University and the National Negro Business League. But clowns like Savant never mention these facts.
All I am really trying to say is that we must be about building up economic structures and institutions within the African Nation, just as Gandhi taught India to do. Nehru led India to use socialist principles to organize Indian industry. Gandhi was not a socialist just as MLK was not one. But when we study Gandhi we learn that which can point us in the direction of socialism. If we study MLK he will point us towards Gandhi. And Gandhi will point us towards Nehru and Nkrumah, etc.
Let us not be stuck on stupid trying to find MLK saying something he did not say. Let's move beyond that and go where he never went but was nonetheless wise enough to point us in that direction. We ought to be studying what Nkrumah did in Ghana ( http://conventionpeoplesparty.org/... ) and Nehru did in India. But most of us have no idea who Nehru was, nor for that matter, who Nkrumah was. Savant have no clear idea about Nkrumah simply because he does not know anything about Nkrumah.
I've read more Nkrumah than you've read King. In my book on King I point out that King was a Christian and democratic socialist, but not a socialist theoretician. His commitment to socialism (which he sometimes calls "fully realized democracy") was more ethical than theoretical. I discerned that from his works and the works of a number of King scholars. Tell me something I don't know.

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#153 Jul 21, 2014
Abdurratln wrote:
<quoted text>
Man, how can you be so nutty? Those are MLK's own words. So we can be certain that that is what it "consists of". You slant to it, and interpretation of is what YOU "consist of", not what MLK "consists of". As long as ti stick closely to MLK's own words of paraphrase therefrom, we are cool. But when you put words into MLK's mouth, you ar3e doing nothing but lying. By now, you ought to have developed sound methodology, especially since you claim to have had a lot of contact to revolutionary thought methods. I do not care how many times you pisss on the sidewalk at an "occupy", you still seem wet behind the ears at best. You do not use any type of scientific or recognizable revolutionary methodology. That alone set you aside from MLK.
I do not know the details of MLK's education. But I do know that he was well versed in the clearest thought of his times. For all of his faults, he never attributed words to Gandhi, for example, that Gandhi never said. And I think he struggled hard to inculcate Gandhism in his own life. Thus, he was more concerned with the underlying principles behind Gandhi than Gandhi's exact words. Thus, he always remained true to Christianity and never converted to Hinduism. But based on what MLK himself said about his own thinking, I think we have to take a close and serious look at Gandhi to understand MLK. And, clearly Mahatma Gandhi has had a huge impact on the African Revolution.
<quoted text>
That is Gandhian.
<quoted text>
That is not Gandhian. You have now drifted off into the theory of Marxian class struggle. I do not believe that that was what MLK was about. True, he wanted to end poverty as did Gandhi. But nowhere in either Gandhi or MLK do we see and evidence that he wanted to "end both race and class divisions". That simple is not true.
Gandhi wanted to reclaim Hindu values by returning to the traditional Hindu culture and economics. Thus, we most often see Gandhi sitting at the spinning wheel.( http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_nJLOuss1ip0/S80Iczd... ). He was a trained lawyer who could earned huge amounts of money by practicing law. Instead, he set an example for the poorest Hindu by showing them how to defeat British colonialism which was based on control of the textile industry which had in turn destroyed Indian textile manufacturing because they could not compete with cheap British machine made products. So Gandhi showed his people how to free themselves by boycotting British textiles and making their own homespun textiles. To this day, Indian industries is based largely on their ability to control their own textile manufacturing. For example, I often wear Asian style Islamic attire. This contributes to Indian economics rather than the white man controlled economies. I do this very consciously.
Continued below...
King spoke many words besides those soken on August 28, 1963. If you've no access to the King Papers, atleast read the collection entitled A TESTAMENT OF HOPE. Most of what you called Gandhism is actually Personalism, both the "homespun African American Personalsim as Rufus Burrows, Jr. calls it, and the systematic Personalism studied by King at Boston University. But Personalism with its idea of the inherent dignity of personality does coincide with many ideas of Gandhi.

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#154 Jul 21, 2014
Abdurratln wrote:
Continued from above…
Unfortunately, MLK died before he was able to articulate and clear and coherent economic theory. He was sympathetic to the union workers. That may very well have led him into the folly of bowing down to the teacher’s union at the expense of school children. We do not know. We do know that since his death, unions have lost a great deal of their previous power. So where is all that going? Nobody knows for sure. And nobody knows for sure where MLK was headed in terms of economics. We do know that his successors are far from solving the economic problem. Resurrection City did not work. But occupy just had to repeat an unworkable folly. Maybe they did it to try to figure out why it did not. But You, Savant, are stuck on stupid. You are fishing in a hole that has no fish in it. So you want to seed it with your own little minnows. I won’t buy it.
<quoted text>
What? You crazy.
<quoted text>
Nice rhetoric that means absolutely nothing beyond the sentimental love that we all had for MLK.
<quoted text>
Ultimately, though, MLK was an idealist. I do not know if he had one ounce of realism in him. But in order to solve the problem of the African, I think we must begin with realism and base ourselves in the concrete facts of history. But you bring some stupid garbage to us from a lying zionist from South Africa who probably never uttered one word against apartheid. At the same time you want us to think you were anti-Apartheid. Well, for me, you still have to prove you are anti-Apartheid. And you can begin by being anti-zionist right now as israel attempts genocide against the defenseless people of Gaza.( http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/2009/0... ) Where is you protest, your boycott of Zionism? We have been trying to organize a boycott of zionism since apartheid came down. Where have you been? You have been somewhere making up lies about MLK.
Crazy? King repeatedly critiques rugged individualism in STRIDE TOWARD FREEDOM (his first book), STRENGTH TO LOVE, and WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE, CHAOS OR COMMUNITY. King's critique of collectivism may receive more attention, and his critique of Communism gets let attention than his critique of capitalism. but critique them he did.

Since: Aug 09

Minneapolis, MN

#155 Jul 21, 2014
Savant wrote:
<quoted text> The reconstructed Japan Europe. There was no Marshall Plan for Haiti... only reprisals
You are definitely correct on this point. But as African voters we all need to be mindful of the fact that any president who harms an African economy is an enemy to the entire African Nation. Usually they are Dummyrats like KKKlinton and Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson was pro-slavery. So although I do not have direct evidence that explicitly state that he imposed economic warfare against Haiti, I strongly suspect that he is the one who started it all. He is the founder of the Dummyrat Party. And the Dummyrats have always been hostile to African Economic Development all down throughout history. KKKlinton was hostile. And Obozobama is hostile.

We know for an indisputable fact that Obozo is responsible for bombing the Great Man Made River ( http://humanrightsinvestigations.org/2011/07/... ). The Great man Made River is probably the greatest African Economic Develo[pmebt Project since the constructions of the Suez Canal [I am referring to the canal that was built prior to the British getting involved.( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canal_of_the_Pha... )] and the Great Pyramids. The Great Man made River will provide hugely incalculably valuable benefit to African people. It is turn the Libyan Desert into a garden. But Obozo made it his top priority to do as much damage as he possibly could to it and actually attempted to destroy it entirely. The only thing that stopped that half-white bastard was a uproar that white people around the world offered when they saw Obozo committing such an outrageous war crime. Attacking a civilian target such as the Great Man Made River is a war crime. And Obama is a war criminal for having done that.

But is that is not enough to prove that Obozo is a war criminal of the worse kind look at what he has done to Somalia. In Somalia, Obozo deliberately starved 260,000 men women and children to death, most of them babies under the age of five. That is an unpardonable war crime and an unforgettable insult to Africans everywhere. Yet voters, black voters have not held that bastard accountable by withholding our support. We think having black face pervert like Obama in office is more important than the lives of 260,000 innocent people. We want to turn a blind eye to this crime. But nature itself cannot absorb such horrendous abuse and ignore it. There is just no way that the relatives, the survivors of that crime will forget. Obozo has created unnecessary enemies to the USA by doing that. It is now impossible for the west to win the hearts and minds of the Somali people in Somalia. This means years and years more war.

The latest example of war crimes by Obozo is that Malaysian airplane that was shot down days ago. Ultimately Obozo is responsible because he overthrew the legitimate government of Ukraine and instralled his puppet Nazi government. So whatever crimes they commit Obozo is responsible for it. They may not have pulled the trigger to shoot that plane down. But they definitely directed it into a combat zone so that somebody could shoot it down. That is another war crime on Obama’s evil hands.

The main point I am making is we elected that bastard. And the first thing he did was destroy our Economic Development efforts. He is a Dummyrat just like KKKlinton and Thomas Jefferson and many others. It is just that I have not studied those others. But these three, KKKlinton, Jefferson and Obama are definitely enemies of the African nation. And we cannot afford to ignore the damage they have done to us. As fast as we can build something, they destroy it.

The last example I want to mention is the economic sanctions against Zimbabwe. We need to demand that the USA government lift the sanction on Zimbabwe immediately and unconditionally. If Obozo cannot do that little bit, we do not need him. And by now, we all know that he cannot and will not do that.

Since: Aug 09

Minneapolis, MN

#156 Jul 21, 2014
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>
King spoke many words besides those soken on August 28, 1963. If you've no access to the King Papers, atleast read the collection entitled A TESTAMENT OF HOPE. Most of what you called Gandhism is actually Personalism, both the "homespun African American Personalsim as Rufus Burrows, Jr. calls it, and the systematic Personalism studied by King at Boston University. But Personalism with its idea of the inherent dignity of personality does coincide with many ideas of Gandhi.
You are bluffing. Give me page numbers. I am not going to even try to read through all those documents looking for two-three words. if you are going to put words into MLK's mouth, it is your intellectual and scholarly duty to show us page numbers. No person of integrity will take your word for it, especially as you, like Chancellor Williams, is know for lying. If you do give proper citation it is always best to assume that you are lying. You are not talking to a fool, here.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Law Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News African-Americans should start voting for Repub... 52 min serfs up 148
News Legal Memorandum 2 hr DARPA 1
News U.S. Attorney issues statement on assault of Tw... 9 hr blindjustus 1
News Children's Mercy Hospital Honored for Combating... 19 hr Nmc 2
News Bail set in Hartle rape case, jury selection to... 21 hr Uhuh 48
News In climate denial, again (Oct '10) 22 hr Earthling-1 110
News How to protect your firm's patents, trade secre... (Jan '14) Sat matthewbeazley 5
More from around the web