top
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Related Categories: East Bay | Anti-War
US Kills Dream King...1-31-17 Mouse Report
by DJ Mouse
Tuesday Jan 31st, 2017 12:58 PM
Martin Luther King Jr. speech in London before Nobel Peace Prize, December 7, 1964...and William Pepper, lawyer in suit finding US government guilty...
from http://www.globalresearch(dot)ca/the-plot-to-kill-martin-luther-king-survived-shooting-was-murdered-in-hospital-an-interview-with-william-pepper/5544005
"...Lula Mae Shelby, had been a surgical aide at St. Joseph’s that night. Shelby told Pepper the story of how his mother came home the morning after the shooting (she hadn’t been allowed to go home the night before) and gathered the family together. He remembers her saying to them, “I can’t believe they took his life.”
She described chief of surgery Dr. Breen Bland entering the emergency room with two men in suits. Seeing doctors working on King, Bland commanded, “Stop working on the nigger and let him die! Now, all of you get out of here, right now. Everybody get out.”
Johnton Shelby says his mother described hearing the sound of the three men sucking up saliva into their mouths and then spitting. Lula Mae described to her family that she looked over her shoulder as she was leaving the room and saw that the breathing tube had been removed from King and that Bland was holding a pillow over his head."
...and on the way to his Nobel Prize he said...
"It may be true that you can’t legislate integration, but you can legislate desegregation. It may be true that morality cannot be legislated, but behavior can be regulated. It may be true that the law can’t change the heart, but it can restrain the heartless. It may be true that the law can’t make a man love me, but it can restrain him from lynching me. And I think that’s pretty important also...Now, as you know, we have been engaged in the United States in a massive struggle to make desegregation and, finally, integration a reality. And in that struggle, there has been an undergirding philosophy: the philosophy of nonviolence, the philosophy and method of nonviolent resistance. And I’d like to say just a few words about the method or the philosophy that has undergirded our struggle. And first I want to say that I’m still convinced that nonviolence is the most potent weapon available to oppressed people in their struggle for freedom and justice. It has a way of disarming the opponent, exposing his moral defenses. It weakens his morale, and at the same time it works on his conscience, and he just doesn’t know how to handle it. If he doesn’t beat you, wonderful. If he beats you, you develop the quiet courage of accepting blows without retaliating. If he doesn’t put you in jail, wonderful. Nobody with any sense loves to go to jail. But if he puts you in jail, you go in that jail and transform it from a dungeon of shame to a haven of freedom and human dignity. Even if he tries to kill you, you develop the inner conviction that there is something so dear, something so precious, something so eternally true, that they are worth dying for. And if a man has not discovered something that he will die for, he isn’t fit to live. And this is what the nonviolent discipline says...And then the other thing about it is that it gives the individual a way of struggling to secure moral ends through moral means. One of the great debates of history has been over the whole question of ends and means. All the way back from the days of Plato’s dialogues coming on up through Machiavelli and others, there have been those individuals who argued that the end justifies the means. But in a real sense, the nonviolent philosophy comes along and says that the end is pre-existent in the means. The means represent the ideal in the making and the end in process. And so that in the long run of history, immoral means cannot bring about moral ends. Somehow man must come to the point that he sees the necessity of having ends and means cohering, so to speak. And this is one of the things that is basic in the nonviolent philosophy at its best. It gives one a way and a method of struggle which says that you can seek to secure moral ends through moral means....It also says that it is possible to struggle against an evil, unjust system, with all your might and with all your heart, and even hate that unjust system, but yet you maintain an attitude of active goodwill and understanding and even love for the perpetrators of that evil system. And this is the most misunderstood aspect of nonviolence. And this is where those who don’t want to follow the nonviolent method say a lot of bad things to those of us who talk about love. But I still go on and believe in it, because I am still convinced that it is love that makes the world go round, and somehow this kind of love can be a powerful force for social change...I’m not talking about a weak love. I’m not talking about emotional bosh here. I’m not talking about some sentimental quality. I’m not talking about an affectionate response. It would be nonsense to urge oppressed people to love their violent oppressors in an affectionate sense, and I have never advised that. When Jesus said, "Love your enemies," I’m happy he didn’t say, "Like your enemies." It’s pretty difficult to like some people. But love is greater than like. Love is understanding creative, redemptive goodwill for all men. Theologians talk about this kind of love with the Greek word agape, which is a sort of overflowing love that seeks nothing in return. And when one develops this, you rise to the position of being able to love the person who does the evil deed, while hating the deed that the person does. And I believe that this can be done. Psychiatrists are telling us now that hatred is a dangerous force, not merely for the hated, but also the hater. Many of the strange things that happen in the subconscious, many of the inner conflicts, are rooted in hate. And so they are saying, "Love or perish." This is why Erich Fromm can write a book entitled The Art of Loving, arguing that love is the supreme unifying force of life. And so it is wonderful to have a method of struggle where it is possible to stand up against segregation, to stand up against colonialism with all of your might, and yet not hate the perpetrators of these unjust systems. And I believe firmly that it is through this kind of powerful nonviolent action, this kind of love that organizes itself into mass action, that we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation and the world into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. Certainly this is the great challenge facing us....Now, I think that nonviolence can work not only in the situation that we find in our country, not only with the magnificent example that we have in India, expressed through the marvelous work of Mohandas K. Gandhi, but I think it can work in ways and in circumstances that we haven’t seen it or we haven’t used it before. And in this context, I would like to say something about South Africa. And I’d like to read just a statement that I have written here so that I’ll be sure that I’ll say everything that I have in mind about the South African situation without missing anything...I understand there are here tonight South Africans, some of whom have been involved in the long struggle for freedom there. In our struggle for freedom and justice in the United States, which has also been so long and difficult, we feel a powerful sense of identification with those in the far more deadly struggle for freedom in South Africa... "Truth forever on the scaffold / Wrong forever on the throne. / Yet that scaffold sways the future, / And behind the then unknown / Standeth God within the shadow, / Keeping watch above his own."...With this faith, we will be able to adjourn the counsels of despair and bring new light into the dark chambers of pessimism. With this faith, we will be able to transform this pending cosmic elegy into a creative psalm of peace and brotherhood. With this faith, we will be able to speed up the day when all of God’s children—black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, Hindus and Muslims, theists and atheists—will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, "Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!"...We have a long, long way to go before this problem is solved, but thank God we’ve made strides. We’ve come a long, long way, before I close by quoting the words of an old Negro slave preacher, who didn’t quite have his grammar and diction right, but who uttered words of great symbolic profundity: "Lord, we ain’t what we want to be. We ain’t what we ought to be. We ain’t what we gonna be. But, thank God, we ain’t what we was." Thank you
by Unity Jack for Mother Nature
Thursday Feb 2nd, 2017 1:50 PM
Most of all it is framed around the Empires who have the diminished power to intervene into modern society and confuse the masses as to its content. Whether to do violence or non-violence as determined from one countries capital city. Moscow or Peking. That is a false way of presenting a Great Debate.

A debate this big and deeply important must realize the rule by Moscow and or Peking is not going to be any where close to what each country with differing material conditions around the actual developing means of production--the class struggle determines smartness and educated on-going process of wisdom says Marx.

It is not a dictate from some one center for all the world to obey. Next it is a great debate not a one way street in which only one of the points or one of the participants in the debate wins. So I say both points are eternal and universal, international, national, and regional.

Whether you need violence depends on the material contradictions of matter-in-motion at any given time. Likewise whether you need non-violence such as peaceful co-existence with differing social systems is also determined by the matter-in-motion, the material reality in front of us.

Peace is necessary at all times and because matter is in motion there is sometimes inevitable violence in nature which is not debateable. Volcanos, earthquakes, hurricanes, cyclones, typhoons, Fires and floods being commonly known.

To say the general line is only always onliy one way is false and empirist error. We need both ways to explain this debate and that includes us, a natural matter- in- motion peoples of an ecological balances of organic and inorganic matter we could not even sleep without peace evern if we were in the centre of the battle of Stalingrad.

So yes even there, peace is needed for sleeping and renewable purposes. However revolutionary violence there is also necessary for the continuation of the liberation process in the world. Intellect tells us which is the main contradiction at any time.

Wise women know what to do most about the sustainablity of our species life. However dumb ignorant empires of Imperialist male origin have made them inferiors to malle domination of the entire species existence and there by threatened our species existence.

Solve the contradiction there and with woman accessing half the law making things like wars of aggression would end as well as our specie ending pollution from fossil fuels dependence. That our specie is threatened by WMD-weapons of mass destruction shows that we need change of direction in each nation and globally to bring liberation again for a living jplanet.

Re-tool to wind, tidal, and solar power and end coal, gas, oil, and nuclear fission atomic power energy as it is destroying the planet livability. You yet have a peaceful world to win!! Egalite' pour la femme dans la revolution, using all means necessary depending on the conditions of life. Workers of the world unite!!