Martin Luther King Jr

[Georgie-Porgie]

That's right Georgie - like Winston Churchill said:  "If you're not a Liberal at age 18 you've got no heart.  And if you're not a conservative at age 40, you've got no Head"

Boon Mee

Boon Mee, I LOVE your posts!!!!!!!!!!!!!

P.S. Winston Churchill was really American

[davidm]

Perhaps you should study your US history. The history of the black American has been one of lynchings, church bombings and cross burnings. All by 'righteous' Christians. The KKK are mostly fundamentalist Christians. I suggest you re-read the part about the civil rights movement in the 60's. I also suggest you remember what ultimately happened to MLK jr and why the USA honors his memory on Jan 14. People who perpetrate these kind of atrocities are no more rational than Muslims simply because they are white. Gandhi certainly had something similar to contend with and his solution worked fairly well. What we lack today is a peaceful charismatic leader. Sad, but I suspect it is a sign of the times.

You should study your original post. No "perhaps" about it. Allow me to refresh your memory.

Monday, January 19th was Martin Luther King jr Day. For those of you who wonder about the relevancy of the man nearly 40 years later, read the following speech. The relevancy of his wisdom to the modern world is amazing.

Since you were talking about the world in 2004, I responded in kind. That's why there were no references to events in the 1960s and oppression of blacks in America etc. not because I am in need of American history lessons. The KKK may be loathsome, but, thankfully, they are practically irrelevant these days.

One of the biggest problems facing the world today is how to eliminate the threat posed by Muslim fundamentalism. (That does not mean "eliminating" the Muslims, merely the threat posed by some fanatics.) As I said in my previous post, these people do not listen to reason or fine words. Love is not reciprocated. For all his virtues, Martin Luther King does not provide a solution to this situation.

[plachon]

plachon, have you been taking your Alzheimer's medicine?

plachon Posted: Mon 2004-01-26, 02:05:10

You're letting your latent racism shine through again man!

I'll let KevinN answer for me:

KevinN Posted: Mon 2004-01-26, 04:05:16

Do not pay too much attn. everything that some one disagrees with they will call you RACIST anymore,it is one of the most mis-used words in the english language.

More "thoughts" from plachon:

plachon Posted: Mon 2004-01-26, 02:05:10

Hence, there was the vilification of Jews, gypsies, gays, etc. even before the death camps were conceived as the "final solution". Pretty much as we've been seeing in US with Muslims, "lefties" (one of your favourite taunts), and anyone who doesn't happen to fit into the mainstream corporate model.

Yeah, sure, America is just like Nazi Germany! Why don't you look at your own posts for one moment plachon. You don't seem to be trying to make any type of sense anymore. All you are doing now is blabbering.

For example:

And by the way, explain some of the differences between anti-globalization and neo-colonialism protesters getting "smashed in the streets" in Seattle, Genoa, Davos, etc., and Gandhi's salt marches, anti-colonialism protests 60 - 80 years ago.

Yeah, so what?" What does that have to with whether Gandhi's tactics would have worked against the Nazis? Against Japan? What is your point?

Where are adjan jb and ######. They are lefties with brains that are still functioning.

Same tactics, same racially/religiously motivated slurs, same state-sponsored violence against dissenters, just a different era. Should have anticipated that even a merde-for-brains red-neck conservative could not see this not-so-subtle comparison, but then nothing surprises me anymore with you G-P.

[Georgie-Porgie]

plachon, would you say that someone who got angry at an acquaintance and slapped them briskly across the face should be charged with the same crime as Charles Manson or Ted Bundy?

Your comparisons are completely silly and senseless, and I'm afraid, so are you.

No wonder they call you guys Left-Wing Loonies!

[Boon Mee]

plachon, would you say that someone who got angry at an acquaintance and slapped them briskly across the face should be charged with the same crime as Charles Manson or Ted Bundy?

Your comparisons are completely silly and senseless, and I'm afraid, so are you.

No wonder they call you guys Left-Wing Loonies!

Georgie,

It's tough getting through to these Left-Wing-Liberal-Lunitic-Fringe types. They really should take a look at History as an example of where Pacifism has gotten the world to date.

Neville Chamberlin in the 1930s hoping Hitler would go away.

Half-hearted attempts at eradicating terrorism in Somolia when Slick Willy was discharging on blue dresses.

Pol Pot in Cambodia - hey Leftie! Ever see the Movie "Killing Fields"?

The list could go on but what's the point. The great silent majority who use rational, pragmatic, objective thinking will, in the end, prevail.

Boon Mee

[Georgie-Porgie]

Boon Mee, more excellent points. You know I agree!

[plachon]

Pol Pot in Cambodia - hey Leftie! Ever see the Movie "Killing Fields"?

The list could go on but what's the point. The great silent majority who use rational, pragmatic, objective thinking will, in the end, prevail.

Boon Mee

Pol Pot, yes, I remember him, he's one of your (read, CIA) creations, along with a load of other murderous despots I could name. A great sense of history, sir!

And I suppose you two or three clowns speak for "the great silent majority", huh?

[Georgie-Porgie]

Yes, as I recall, according to you lefties, Pol Pot was on the CIA payroll, wasn't he? And Bin Ladin? Bin Ladin was his Commanding Officer if I remember correctly? Or was it the other way around? Elvis Presley was Captain. Lee Harvey Oswald was First Lieutenant. John Wayne Gassey was Gunner's Mate. Captain Kangaroo was a PFC. The CIA was really wild back in those days!

QUOTE: (Boon Mee @ Tue 2004-01-27, 03:08:28)

The great silent majority who use rational, pragmatic, objective thinking will, in the end, prevail. 

[adjan jb]

I don't know for Ted Bundy and Charles Manson.

But Ossama was on the CIA payroll. Ho Chi Minh as well (under the nickname of "craven", his favorite fags).

[Boon Mee]

I don't know for Ted Bundy and Charles Manson.

But Ossama was on the CIA payroll. Ho Chi Minh as well (under the nickname of "craven", his favorite fags).

Adjan - how do you know this stuff? Are you a "Spook" working out of an office down on Wireless Road perchance???

[Jeepz]

adjan jb~

CIA didn't exist at the time you are referencing. Ho Chi Minh was a leader in the anti-Japanese resistance movement. He worked with OSS agents. In fact an OSS agent saved his life when he was very ill.

Making the leap that he "worked" for the CIA is bit much. This is the same sort activity or similiar to red painting that Joe McArthy was famous for. Ho Chi Minh was a nationalist with socialist leanings. However, I have read that he did have some favorable attitude toward the USA at the end of WWII. But the political intrigues, shifting alliances, and so forth, caused the USA to accede to France's return to SEA as a colonial entity. Ho Chi Minh didn't appreciate that. And none of it makes him a CIA lackey.

This sort of guilt by association would make the USA a Communist entity, simply because we were aligned with them for a period of time during WWII. It ignores all other activities by both parties, changes of attitudes, etc.

Bin Laden accepted assistance from the CIA during the Cold War while we opposed their entry into Afghanistan. Doesn't make him a CIA operative in everything he does for the rest of his life. Same for Castro. He tried out for US Major League baseball team, if I remember correctly. So he's really a closet agent of National League?

And hey, Captain Kangaroo just passed away. He was totally apolitical. He basically took care of kids regardless of whatever political orientation their parents had. So let's leave him off the motley crew of bad guys, eh?

Jeepz

[sbk]

Davidm said:

Since you were talking about the world in 2004, I responded in kind. That's why there were no references to events in the 1960s and oppression of blacks in America etc. not because I am in need of American history lessons. The KKK may be loathsome, but, thankfully, they are practically irrelevant these days.

Actually I was responding to someone who said the tactics wouldn't work on Nazi Germany. I am of the opinion that those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. (Sorry for the cliche, but really, it is true) So, although you may think the oppression of blacks is irrelevant it may have some bearing if you think about previous posts, not just my original post. Which, to be honest, wasn't necessarily about just non-violent resistance, but about people's attitudes, which, lets face it, have not changed at all. I am sure many people back then felt the same about the 'uppity blacks' that

these people do not listen to reason or fine words. Love is not reciprocated.

.

I personally am apalled by fanaticism of any kind. Whether it be fundamentalist muslims killing people randomly, people who blow up family planning clinics and gun down doctors because they perform abortions, people who tie up, torture and beat to death homosexuals, people who like to kick other people to death or near death because of the color of their skin. Take your pick, all of these people have one thing in common and it is not race or religion but hate. And this is what MLK was talking about

We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for the victims of our nation, for those it calls "enemy," for no document from human hands can make these humans any less our brothers.

This call for a worldwide fellowship that lifts neighborly concern beyond one's tribe, clan, race, class, and nation is in reality a call for an all-embracing and unconditional love for all mankind. We can no longer afford to worship the God of hate or bow before the altar of retaliation. The oceans of history are made turbulent by the ever-rising tides of hate. History is cluttered with the wreckage of nations and individuals that pursued this self-defeating path of hate.

[Georgie-Porgie]

adjan jb~

CIA didn't exist at the time you are referencing.  Ho Chi Minh was a leader in the anti-Japanese resistance movement.  He worked with OSS agents.  In fact an OSS agent saved his life when he was very ill. 

Making the leap that he "worked" for the CIA is bit much.  This is the same sort activity or similiar to red painting that Joe McArthy was famous for.  Ho Chi Minh was a nationalist with socialist leanings.  However, I have read that he did have some favorable attitude toward the USA at the end of WWII.  But the political intrigues, shifting alliances, and so forth, caused the USA to accede to France's return to SEA as a colonial entity.  Ho Chi Minh didn't appreciate that.  And none of it makes him a CIA lackey.

This sort of guilt by association would make the USA a Communist entity, simply because we were aligned with them for a period of time during WWII.  It ignores all other activities by both parties, changes of attitudes, etc. 

Bin Laden accepted assistance from the CIA during the Cold War while we opposed their entry into Afghanistan.  Doesn't make him a CIA operative in everything he does for the rest of his life.  Same for Castro.  He tried out for US Major League baseball team, if I remember correctly.  So he's really a closet agent of National League? 

And hey, Captain Kangaroo just passed away.  He was totally apolitical.  He basically took care of kids regardless of whatever political orientation their parents had.  So let's leave him off the motley crew of bad guys, eh?

Jeepz

Eloquent Jeepz! A blow for truth and honesty. These types of politically correct stereo-types, myths and lies are exactly what I keep complaining about. Take them away, and you take away 95% of plachon, pepe, Butterfly and adjan jb's repertoire of so-called "facts".

[pepe]

To jeepz,

Ho Chi Minh was not paid by the CIA but by the OSS (until 1946 or 47). This doesn't make a big difference.

But how can you call him "a nationalist with socialist leanings", don't you know that he was one of the founding members of the French Communist Party. This is more than "a leaning", don't you think ?

As for Osama Bin Laden, "he accepted assistance from the CIA", you said. This certainly means that the CIA provided him with weapons, logistic support, training and money. You gave him the knowledge and the means. In other words, YOU'VE CREATED THE MONSTER WHO MASTERMINDED THE ATTACKS ON AMERICA IN 2001.

Georgie-Porgie congratulated you for bringing us some truth and honesty. I also would like to express my gratitude.

[Georgie-Porgie]

More politically correct lies. It is pretty well known that Ho Chi Minh was a Communist because they were the only ones who would support his revolution, and that is what he really cared about. In other words, he wasn't really a Communist; He was a pragmatist.

As far as Bin Ladin goes, using pepe le' pew's schizoid logic, whoever gave him his initial military training, would have "created the monster". I have never read anywhere that we were the ones who gave him his first military training.

In fact, I have often read the opposite, that the group that Bin Ladin was part of disdained any help, of any type, from the US.

In either case, as Jeepz says, a little help fighting the Evil Empire hardly makes Bin Ladin a CIA operative.

[Boon Mee]

To Georgie:

As always, it's impossible to fathom the Liberal rational. What precisely are they proposing to do? Turn tail and abondon Iraq to the mullahs and Syrians? Revert to the Democrats tried-and-true method of abandoning the region to any local Pol Pot who might turn up?

The only people whom liberals absolutely refuse to hold accountable for anything are their friends, the Islamofascists.

[Georgie-Porgie]

As always, it's impossible to fathom the Liberal rational.

The only people whom liberals absolutely refuse to hold accountable for anything are their friends, the Islamofascists.

Truer words were never spoken. It's not their fault that they are worthless, murdering dirtbags: Everything and anything is Uncle Sam's fault. Wa. Wa. Wa!

[the cynic]

"It's pretty well know that Ho Chi Minh was a communist because they were the only ones who would support his revolution.(...) In other words he wasn't really a communist. He was a pragmatic" wrote Georgie-Porgie.

Plain ignorance, my friend.

The French Communist Party was founded in 1920 by, among others Loriot and Ho Chi Minh (even if it only took the name of Communist Party in 1922) so 26 years before Uncle Ho proclaimed the independance of Viêt-Nam in a now famous speech given in Hanoi in 1946.

Ho Chi minh didn't become a Communist because he was a pragmatic but because he really had faith in Communism.

I know that this has nothing to do in this thread but I couldn't let an ignorant distorted the facts and get away with it.

my regards,

the Cynic.

[Boon Mee]

Before the war, the appeasers said Saddam was not a threat to America's interests in the region, was not developong WMDs and did not harbor terrorists.

Now that we've taken the country and are uncovering mass graves, canisters of poison gasses, victims of Saddam's WMDs and colonies of terrorists, liberals are claiming the war created it all. The termites are swarming out into the light of day, and liberals are blaming the exterminator!

As GWB said: You are with the terrorists or you are with America. We're getting a pretty clear picture who is with the terrorists and as George Patton said, I like when the enemy shoots at me; then I know where the bastards are and can kill them.

Boon Mee

[Georgie-Porgie]

Here are just a few examples of scholars who disagree with the "the cynic." It took me about 3 minutes to find them.

There is more ambiguity--more shadows and fog--in the official biographies regarding the period from 1934 to 1938. Recently opened archives in Moscow show that Ho was subjected to Stalinist discipline there. He was required to undergo re-education for failing to display the proper class spirit and identify with the international proletariat.

The responsibility for the war falls to the French and to Charles de Gaulle, who wanted to re-establish the French Empire after World War II. Even the French communists rallied to support this policy. And what about the Americans? Truman abandoned Roosevelt's anti-colonial policy and supported French imperial aspirations. And who undermined the 1954 Geneva Accords and prevented the general elections in 1956? U.S. officials, who also ignored letters from Ho pleading for support.

Ho Chi Minh was one of the most amazing, well-traveled and culturally experienced leaders of this century. I had no idea that he had spent some time in the U.S., working as a steward on a ship so that he could travel and experience other cultures. His reasoning was that he needed to understand other cultures if he was to deal with them. To me, this is the strongest argument in favor of his being a nationalist first and a communist second. As his adventures are chronicled, you realize that this was a very idealistic man who held one idea uppermost in mind, namely independence for Vietnam. Traveling around the world by working as a menial and spending his few earnings to write independence literature does not seem to be the behavior of a communist agent.

The policies of the Western democracies pushed Ho and his people into the open arms of the Soviet Union and China. He took their tanks, ships, airplanes and missiles, but he refused to allow foreign combat troops on Vietnamese soil. And he declined Russian and Chinese advice on how to conduct the war.

[plachon]

Here are just a few examples of scholars who disagree with the "the cynic." It took me about 3 minutes to find them.

There is more ambiguity--more shadows and fog--in the official biographies regarding the period from 1934 to 1938. Recently opened archives in Moscow show that Ho was subjected to Stalinist discipline there. He was required to undergo re-education for failing to display the proper class spirit and identify with the international proletariat.

The responsibility for the war falls to the French and to Charles de Gaulle, who wanted to re-establish the French Empire after World War II. Even the French communists rallied to support this policy. And what about the Americans? Truman abandoned Roosevelt's anti-colonial policy and supported French imperial aspirations. And who undermined the 1954 Geneva Accords and prevented the general elections in 1956? U.S. officials, who also ignored letters from Ho pleading for support.

Ho Chi Minh was one of the most amazing, well-traveled and culturally experienced leaders of this century. I had no idea that he had spent some time in the U.S., working as a steward on a ship so that he could travel and experience other cultures. His reasoning was that he needed to understand other cultures if he was to deal with them. To me, this is the strongest argument in favor of his being a nationalist first and a communist second. As his adventures are chronicled, you realize that this was a very idealistic man who held one idea uppermost in mind, namely independence for Vietnam. Traveling around the world by working as a menial and spending his few earnings to write independence literature does not seem to be the behavior of a communist agent.

The policies of the Western democracies pushed Ho and his people into the open arms of the Soviet Union and China. He took their tanks, ships, airplanes and missiles, but he refused to allow foreign combat troops on Vietnamese soil. And he declined Russian and Chinese advice on how to conduct the war.

Hey G-P, thought you said "scholars" (plural) and you should always reference your quotes to validate them. What kind of educashun did you get me ol' mucker?

[Axel]

At first I was surprised how the threat went from MLK to Uncle Ho.

A search in TIME gives me an explanation:

QUOTE

MLK:

He led a mass struggle for racial equality that doomed segregation and changed America forever

HO CHI MINHFor Americans, it was the longest war — and the first defeat — in their history, and it drastically changed the way they perceived their role in the world. QUOTE

So that's it, both have onbe thing in common, they changed America.

Now don't tell me, TIME is left, or right, liberal or criminal. Usually I don't read the magazine, but understand within the USA quite respected.

Here is the link:

http://www.time.com/time/time100/leaders/p.../hochiminh.html

[sbk]

You and me both, Axel. The original posting was a speech MLK gave regarding American attitudes and opinions especially regarding hatred of other people. Which, if you re-read this whole twisted thread, is obviously what a lot of people feel about each other. Hating the Muslim terrorists puts me on their level. Oppressing them and hunting them down feeds directly into their own persecution complex, which they can then use to show more rational people, "see it's true, America does hate muslims and that is why we must fight them more".

Call me a liberal but hey, check your dictionary, the definition there of liberal: fair, charitable, generous. As opposed to unfair and greedy?? Which one is the insult here?

[Boon Mee]

Well folks, the problem as I see it is liberals are indignant for every day that America has not turned a barbaric land into Vermont. They were willing to give Stalin 36 years for his miserable revolution. We (Coalition of the Willing) have essentially imposed a revolution on Iraq - and liberals give us a month to work out the bugs. McArthur was still straightening out Japan five years after V-J Day!

Boon Mee

[Guest IT Manager]

Every day, I learn a little bit more. The revelation about Uncle Ho is intriguing. Imagine Captain Moonface doing the "walk around the world" to find out how to deal with more responsible governments, than his own.

A trip to South Africa to see their "management" (today not 5 years ago), of HIV may give him a clue about telling bare-faced lies to the electorate in an effort to keep them subdued, about what may be a widely life-threatening situation. The results of telling lies to the electorate may take time to catch up, but I firmly believe they will at some stage. Not all students have waied every teacher and got on with being Thai. Some read outside the educational envelope and formulate views and opinions, which after the October bloodshed some years ago,. he will find the parents, aunts, uncles, servants, not all that willing to swallow as "in your own good, people".

A developing democracy in my opinion, and developing quite nicely.

IT

[Axel]

Call me a liberal but hey, check your dictionary, the definition there of liberal: fair, charitable, generous. As opposed to unfair and greedy?? Which one is the insult here?

The problem really is too much hate, too much violence.

MLK for sure lived at a wrong time, or perhaps his death changed a lot.

Liberal? Where I come from we have left and right, liberal is in the middle. So with this and your dictionary, take it as a compliment.

[Georgie-Porgie]

[Hey G-P, thought you said "scholars" (plural) and you should always reference your quotes to validate them.

plachon, is that all you've got?

I did say "scholars" (plural), and I was correct, but, anyway, in the future, when I feel petty, I'll point out your minor spelling and grammar mistakes.

I was in a hurry, and just trying to answer cynic's post in time to make lunch, but, thanks for the patronizing lesson in Net "educashun". They didn't teach that back in my day.

[Axel]

[Hey G-P, thought you said "scholars" (plural) and you should always reference your quotes to validate them.

plachon, is that all you've got?

I did say "scholars" (plural), and that was correct, but, anyway, in the future, when I feel petty, I'll point out your minor spelling and grammar mistakes.

I was in a hurry, and just trying to answer cynic's post in time to make lunch, but, thanks for the lesson in Net "educashun". They didn't teach that back in my day.

Never mind the spelling. Some interesting comments on HCM anyway.

While I was in school, I was taught that he is wrong and being a communist, an enemy of the free world.

Seeking freedom for one's own country should be treated as honourable. To refuse to allow foreign combat troops on Vietnamese soil as well. Albeit it seems to me he reached this target only partly in 54 but died in 69, too early to see his wish come true.

Your quotes put him in a completely different light.

[Georgie-Porgie]

Well, if it means anything. I think that we made a big mistake in Vietnam. We should have fukced the French and got Ho Chi Minh on our side when he asked for our support. Another chance to export Democracy, and I suspect that he would have been quite happy with a free, democratic Republic of Vietnam.

In fact, everybody would have been happy except for the back-stabbing, phoney-ass French. May they drown in bitter wine.

[the cynic]

To Georgie-Porgie,

You made a mistake. Bitter wine is Californian not French.