NewTrendMag.org
 
News
 # 
1007
[
Arabic
][
Deutsch
][
Español
][
Français
][
Italiano
]
Zulhijjah 18,1426/January 19, 2006  #5
[Scroll down 
to Wilmer Leon's article on Dr. Martin Luther King's famous 
speeches which the Bush administration pretends, do not exist!]
WAR News:
PAKISTAN: Following the bombing of a Pakistani village by the 
U.S., anti-U.S. demonstrations began in the tribal areas of 
Pakistan on January 14. The leader of Jamaate Islami, 
Qazi Hussain Ahmed, called for nationwide demonstrations to 
condemn the bombing on January 15. These rallies were a great 
success and spread to, literally, every city and town in 
Pakistan. The biggest anti-U.S. protests were held in 
Karachi, Lahore, Rawalpindi, Peshawar and Multan.
Qazi Hussain Ahmed has called on General Musharraf to resign 
or he will be removed by public pressure.
MOST AMAZING PART of the protests was that MQM, a 
usually pro-General Musharraf and narrowly ethnic grouping 
based in Karachi, joined the anti-U.S. rallies. MQM leader 
Altaf Hussain, based in London, telephoned Qazi Hussain Ahmed 
to ask permission to join the rallies.
Even more amazing, the Muslim League (Q), a party organized 
by Musharraf to support his policies, joined the opposition 
rallies and condemned the bombing in the strongest possible 
terms. In one gathering, ML[Q] warned the U.S. that Pakistan 
is not Afghanistan or Iraq. If Pakistan is attacked, we will 
retaliate, they declared.
USA's name is mud in Pakistan. General Musharraf and his U.S. 
armed forces are isolated. Observers say that the time might 
be near for Musharraf's removal. Will he go by peaceful means? 
Few believe that he will go peacefully.
His government is claiming that the U.S. did not tell them of 
its plans to attack. Sen. McCain, however, said on U.S. TV 
[MSNBC] that Pakistan was informed of the attack.
IRAQ:
Fighting continues on a daily basis. A total of 2,220 
U.S. troops have been killed and 16,300 wounded. After 
the "elections" of December 15, a total of 68 
U.S. troops have been killed.
During the week of January 14-19, three U.S. helicopters 
were shot down, a Black Hawk, a Kiowa and an Apache. 
According to a report on NPR, the mujahideen are using 
an aerial version of improvised explosive devices [IEDs] 
to bring down the copters.
AFGHANISTAN:
Taliban seem to be on the offensive. On January 15, a 
Taliban martyrdom operator entered a Canadian military 
convoy in the Kandahar area. A Canadian diplomat and two 
Afghan soldiers guarding him were killed and 3 Canadian 
soldiers and 5 Afghans wounded.
Mullah Omar's message has come out: There will be no talks 
with Karzai as long as occupation forces are in Afghanistan, 
he says.. Karzai fears for his life and has urged NATO-U.S. 
troops not to leave him. [Observers say, Karzai is the first 
Afghan in all of history to ask non-Muslim anti-Islam forces 
to stay in Afghanistan.]
Jamaat al-Muslimeen News [3 items]
P.O. Box 10881
Baltimore, MD 21234
Imam Warith Deen Umar Facing State Terrorism
On December 30, Imam Umar's apartment in the Bronx, New York, 
was attacked and desecrated. On January 6, 2006 his home in 
Albany, NY,  was attacked and police dogs entered his family home.
There is absolutely no reason other than than state terrorism 
that a distinguished citizen of the country should be treated 
in this shameful way.
This whole process started when the Wall Street Journal 
smeared Imam Umar in a front page report. In Ramadan 
[late last year] the government seemingly obtained a 
tape of Imam Umar's khutba from Siraj Wahhaj's mosque 
and during the December 30 incident tried to use it 
against Imam Umar. [Siraj is a leader of ISNA, America's 
biggest pro-government Muslim group.]
The government has failed both to intimidate and to provoke 
Imam Umar. His rights have been violated. He has not broken 
any law and he has a distinguished record of service.
We urge all Muslims and non-Muslims of conscience to rally 
to the support of the Imam. This time the government will 
lose, inshallah. It is time to stop the Zionist abuse of 
Muslims in this country.
 
New York Zionist TV Channels Attack Imam Umar.
[Several Jamaat al-Muslimeen sympathizers in NY have reported this.]
New York's TV channels on January 6 attacked Imam Umar. 
Instead of reporting on what the police was doing in the 
Imam's home, TV was trying desperately to justify the state 
terrorism by innuendo connecting the Imam to "guns" and to 
"approval of 9.11."
Ph.D. In Cell: Difficulties in Raising Bond Money
Dr. Kifah al-Jayyousi's bond application was accepted 
but the amount is so large that he has not been able to 
collect the whole amount yet. In spite of community support, 
he is still short by $16,000. Persons of good will who can 
contribute are urged to send donation and/or loans to this address:
Kifah Jayyousi trust account
c/o William W. Swor, attorney
3060 Penobscot Building
645 Griswold St.
Detroit, Michigan 48226
ISLAM in AMERICA:
Working for the Government Under Cover of Islam?
The Case of Siraj Wahhaj who Helped Put Dr. Omar 'Abdel Rahman 
in Prison for Life. Evidence that Siraj is Irresponsible and 
helps the Zionists.
[New Trend Special Investigative report.]
It's not news that the U.S. government tries to recruit 
Muslims to spy on other Muslims. What's news is that 
self-styled Muslim "leaders" openly say that that they 
want to work for the government and in the same breath 
claim that they are Islamic or Muslim.
We had the case of ISNA-AMC "activist" Abdur Rahman al-Amoudi 
who admitted [in writing] that he was working for the 
government, and  used cash from the State Department to 
buy the conscience of Muslims.
The most important case of a Muslim helping the regime to 
punish a Muslim is that of "Imam" Siraj Wahhaj. It's 
important to identify the anti-Islam activities of 
Siraj Wahhaj. Under the U.S. Constitution, he has the 
right to help the government. Under the same Constitution, 
we have the right to point out that Siraj's activities 
negate Islam and that he has breached the TRUST of the 
Muslim community. Remember that we have nothing personal 
against Siraj and we want him to live in peace, but not 
in the guise of an Islamic Imam.
Here are the facts:
- 
Siraj Wahhaj was called as a DEFENSE WITNESS in the case of 
Shaikh Omar 'Abdel Rahman. Instead of defending the Shaikh, 
he claimed that the Shaikh taught Muslims to carry out bank 
robberies! The shocked  defense attorney immediately 
stopped that line of questioning.
 - 
The Shaikh [Dr.] Omar 'Abdel Rahman was sentenced to life 
in prison, a blind man put away for life, sealed away from 
the world, not allowed to meet anyone.
 - 
In his sentencing statement, the Jewish judge, Mukasey, 
cited the allegations made by Siraj Wahhaj.
 
Siraj has deeply infiltrated the Muslim communities of America. 
He and his friends, like Mauri Saalakhan and Imam Talib, take 
an interesting line in their defense of Siraj Wahhaj. Firstly, 
they don't want Siraj  to speak for himself, which in itself 
is a violation of Islam. The Qur'an says:
"No bearer of burdens shall bear the burden of another." [6:164]
Then they say, Siraj said what he had to say because he was in 
court under oath and he had to say what the Shaikh said. That's 
a big lie in itself because Siraj made a statement about the 
Shaikh without providing any verifiable source for his 
information. Where did he hear the Shaikh say anything 
like that? What date was it?  Nothing! Siraj did not provide 
any proof. He simply made a statement which helped the 
PROSECUTION, although he was a defense witness.
The question arises: Was Siraj Wahhaj speaking the truth 
because he was under oath or is he a liar who is in the 
habit of helping the Zionist Jews with his lies. I am of 
the opinion that he is a liar and helps the Jews. Here is my evidence:
In the Wall Street Journal of October 24, 2003, 
Paul Barrett published an extensive interview with "Imam" 
Siraj Wahhaj in which he glorified Siraj as a leader of 
Muslims and a charismatic figure. Bear in mind that the 
Wall Street Journal is the capitalist wing of 
America's Jewish power structure. Previously, the same 
writer atacked Imam Warith Deen Umar in the 
Wall Street Journal and destroyed his career. 
[WSJ also spawned Asra Nomani.]
This is what the WSJ reports Siraj Wahhaj as saying about 
Shaikh Omar 'Abdel Rahman while the Shaikh was allegedly 
speaking to a gathering in Siraj's mosque:
"Shaikh suggested that Muslims rob banks to benefit Islam. 
Imam Wahhaj says he interrupted to point out that there were 
convicted felons in the audience, and the Shaikh, laughing, 
retracted the remark."
Notice the most obvious lie in Siraj's statement. He forgot 
that Shaikh Omar 'Abdel Rahman DOES NOT KNOW ENGLISH. There 
was no way the "convicted felons" in the audience could have 
known what he was saying.
Liar that Siraj Wahhaj is, he does not realize how strict 
the Shaikh is about Islamic Law [Sharia]. For instance, 
the Shaikh does not want Muslims living in America to eat 
meat from animals not properly slaughtered [zabiha] under 
Islamic Law. To claim that such a man would preach the 
robbing of banks is nothing but character assassination. 
It's back biting about a helpless prisoner whom the 
Zionists have buried alive.
Why did Siraj have to talk such nonsense to a WSJ reporter? 
This was not the court of law and there was no pressing 
need to talk about Shaikh Omar who is a prisoner and cannot 
answer Siraj Wahhaj.. The ISNA leader was obviously out to 
destroy the reputation of the Shaikh. He wanted to help 
the Jews against a man who is a Ph.D from Al-Azhar, knows 
the entire Qur'an and Sahih Bukhari from memory, and is 
an expert on Fiqh. Siraj Wahhaj told a Jewish paper, the 
WSJ, that this man of Allah, this saintly worshiper of 
the Creator, was so low down that he was teaching the 
Muslims of America to rob banks.
Siraj Wahhaj's story, for which he provided no verifiable 
evidence, evidently fits right into the U.S. government's 
conspiracy theory against Shaikh Omar 'Abdel Rahman.
Who is Siraj Wahhaj? He is a CENTRAL LEADER of the 
pro-government organization known as ISNA [so-called 
Islamic Society of North America]. ISNA works closely 
with the FBI and endorses all of President Bush's 
policies and keeps quiet about all of the President's 
atrocities. Of course ISNA has the right to work closely 
with the FBI but does it have the right to call itself 
Islamic? The Qur'an says: NO. The Prophet, pbuh, says: 
NO. The Sahabah say: NO. All the great scholars of Islam 
say: NO. There cannot be cooperation with oppressors 
under the banner of Islam.
"And incline not to those who oppress, or the Fire 
will touch you; and you have no protectors other than 
Allah, nor shall you be helped." [11:113]
Siraj Wahhaj is no ordinary supporter of ISNA. He has 
been, for years,  ISNA's central Shoora member. He is 
not known to have opposed ISNA on anything. In fact, 
reports are that he says ISNA is following the Sunnah 
of the Prophet, pbuh. [Astaghfirullah!] Not surprisingly, 
Siraj's photo appears every now and then in ISNA's 
publicity material which portrays him as an Islamic 
leader (!), just about as Islamic as ISNA's Secretary General Syed Syeed.
If Siraj Wahhaj is a genuine Muslim and fears Allah, what 
stops him from apologizing to the Muslim Ummah for helping 
to imprison Dr. Omar 'Abdel Rahman? Let's suppose that he 
is not an agent of the government, deliberate or 
not-so-deliberate, is it not possible for him to make 
a mistake? We all make mistakes. Why not admit it?
WHO IS TRYING to BUILD UP SIRAJ WAHHAJ?
Instead we find Siraj's minions like Mauri Saalakhan 
trying to build up Siraj as a leader, trying to compare 
him to Imam Jamil al-Amin! Some kind of ego worship is 
involved here. Siraj Wahhaj ignored the historic 
rally in support of Imam Jamil just before the 
Millions More Movement. Then Mauri Saalakhan tried 
to denigrate the rally itself.
Next we need to look at Siraj Wahhaj's source of income.
[We urge Siraj to apologize to the Muslims. Dr. Omar 
'Abdel Rahman, great scholar of Islam, propbably the 
greatest living scholar of Islam, is languishing in a 
U.S. prison cell, cut off from the entire world.  Siraj 
Wahhaj, Abdur Rahman al-Amoudi (another ISNA agent) and 
other collaborators helped to bring about this tragic situation.]
[To be continued.]
Puerto Rican Leader Was Shot by U.S. Forces and left to Die a Slow Death
[Major atrocities by the U.S. are hidden from the American people. 
This happened months back and was censored by all TV channels but 
was broken by a foreign source.]
GRANMA INTERNATIONAL
Havana. September 26, 2005
http://www.granma.cu/ingles/2005/septiembre/lun26/40fbi.html
FBI let Puerto Rican independence fighter bleed to death
SAN JUAN, September 25.—The leader of the underground Puerto Rican 
People's Army (EPB-Macheteros), Filiberto Ojeda Ríos, bled to death 
virtually killed – due to lack of medical attention after being hit 
by a bullet in his right clavicle, it was confirmed today in this 
capital.
Dr. Héctor Pesquera told Prensa Latina that "the FBI let him 
bleed to death," after being shot by a sniper brought in from 
the United States.
Pesquera, spokesperson for the Hostosiano National Independence
Movement (MINH), took part in the autopsy last night in the 
capital's Forensic Science Institute, during which it was 
confirmed that the body of the EPB-Macheteros leader only 
revealed one bullet wound.
Pesquera assured PL that evidently, the FBI tactic was not to 
intervene so that "Comandante Ojeda Ríos would bleed to death 
through lack of medical attention."
"The bullet penetrated the top part of the right clavicle, crossed 
his lung and exited from his back, where it lodged in the 
bullet-proof vest that he was wearing," stated the doctor.
The death of Ojeda Ríos happened last Friday in the western 
municipality of Hormigueros, after he was surrounded by a 
contingent of 300-plus agents, including 20 snipers 
brought in from Virginia (United States).
The 72-year-old leader, who used a pacemaker, was in Hormigueros to 
celebrate the Grito de Lares, when the independence movement 
recalls the proclamation of the first Republic of Puerto Rico 
on September 23, 1868.
U.S. Ally in South Asia Carries out Severe Repression of Muslims.
Thai PM says missing lawyer dead
Thailand's prime minister has said a Muslim human rights lawyer 
who went missing in 2004 may have been killed by government officials.
PM Thaksin Shinawatra also said that an ongoing investigation 
into Somchai Neelaphaijit's disappearance suggested more than 
four officials were involved.
A court on Thursday jailed one policeman but acquitted 
four others for illegally detaining Mr Neelaphaijit.
The lawyer's wife Angkhana and human rights groups denounced the verdict.
Mr Neelaphaijit was last seen at a Bangkok hotel in March 
2004, and rights groups fear he was killed because of his 
criticism of police conduct in the south of the country, 
where there is an ongoing Muslim insurgency.
Mr Thaksin said that prosecutors would file a new case, 
possibly as soon as next month.
He said a special team from the Department of Special 
Investigation (DSI) was now working on murder charges, 
based on circumstantial evidence gathered since the original trial began.
"I know that Somchai is dead, and more than four 
government officials were involved, but witnesses 
and evidence are still being collected," Mr Thaksin 
was quoted as telling the French news agency AFP.
None of the suspects at the first trial were tried for 
murder, only illegal detention and robbery.
Mr Thaksin did not say if the new charges would be 
filed against the same people as before, or against 
other government officials.
Southern insurgency
Somchai Neelaphaijit's disappearance and his subsequent 
trial have put Thailand's treatment of human rights under the spotlight.
Rights groups maintain that the 52-year-old lawyer was 
kidnapped and killed by police officers, because of his 
vocal criticism of the Thai security services' handling 
of the unrest in the south.
The authorities in southern Thailand are battling a 
long-running insurgency by Islamic separatists, which 
has led to the deaths of more than 1,000 people in the past two years.
In the months before his disappearance, Mr Neelaphaijit 
had defended Muslim suspects in connection with violence, 
and went missing soon after claiming some of his clients 
had been tortured.
What the New Generation is not Told about Dr. Martin Luther King:
Replace "Vietnam" with "Iraq" in his speeches to see relevance.
by Wilmer Leon, Ph.D [Exclusive to New Trend.]
[Excerpted from his radio program "On With Leon.]
[Dr. Leon quotes from King's speeches which are being 
kept away from America's new generation.]
I am truly convinced that Dr. King, his sacrifice, his vision, 
and all that he stood for has permeated the American psyche 
just as the likes of George Washington and Abraham Lincoln 
since yesterday I saw that one of the major mattress stores, 
Mattress Discounters or Mattress Warehouse is having a 
Martin Luther King weekend sale. Go over there, get your 
sleep on, save 20%. Fulfill the dream, live the dream, 
buy a mattress. You know you have made it in America 
when barons of capitalism incorporate you into the 
process of making money. Yes, America, we have overcome!
Dr. King was born January 15, 1929 and assassinated on 
April 4, 1968. He would be 77 years old now if the forces 
of evil had not cut him down. Yes, the forces of evil, 
those internal terrorists who hate what we stand for, 
our quest for freedom, liberty, and equality.
It took 15 years to create the federal Martin Luther King, 
Jr., holiday. Congressman John Conyers, Democrat from 
Michigan, first introduced legislation for a commemorative 
holiday four days after King was assassinated in 1968. 
After the bill became stalled, petitions endorsing the 
holiday containing six million names were submitted to Congress.
Conyers and Rep. Shirley Chisholm, Democrat of New York, 
resubmitted King holiday legislation each subsequent 
legislative session. Public pressure for the holiday 
mounted during the 1982 and 1983 civil rights marches in Washington.
Congress passed the holiday legislation in 1983, which 
was then signed into law by President Ronald Reagan.
I've thought and thought about what to present today. 
Who to present today? How to discuss Dr. King in a manner 
that will not bore you, a manner that is new and fresh. 
The question that comes to mind is "Is Dr. King relevant 
today?" If so, how?
I believe that Dr. King has been compromised. It is 
comfortable for America to remember Dr. King as a 
dreamer and a visionary. I am sure that Monday you 
will hear President Bush hailing Dr. King as a great 
American because of his dream, his vision, his quest 
for a day when children can live in a nation where 
they will not be judged by the color of their skin 
but by the content of their character. Let's not forget 
that Dr. King was assassinated for that Dream. Yes, 
the forces of evil, those internal terrorists who hate 
what we stand for, our quest for freedom, liberty, 
and equality killed Dr. King for demanding that America 
live up to its ideals, live up to its values and morals.
President Bush and many others like him will stay focused 
on that vision, focused on that Dream. They will try and 
sell you that dream, as the major mattress stores, 
Mattress Discounters or Mattress Warehouse, one of 
those places is having a Martin Luther King weekend 
sale. Go over there, get your sleep on, save 20%. Don't 
wake up to deal with your nightmare, stay focused on 
the dream, enjoy your mattress.
On Dr. King Day, President Bush and his minions will 
focus on the dream, not your reality. You won't hear 
President Bush talk about Beyond Vietnam: A Time To 
Break Silence or as others have called it To Atone 
for Our Sins and Errors in Vietnam.  Oh, no. He will 
never quote a line from that speech. The reality is 
too stark, too real and relevant for America. Let's 
stay lost in the Dream.
In Let Nobody Turn Us Around: Voices of Resistance, 
Reform, and Renewal the editors of this volume Manning 
Marable and Leith Mullings, write, "though Martin 
Luther King, Jr. is frequently remembered for his 
'I have a Dream' speech at the 1963 March on Washington, 
in the last several years of his life his politics moved 
to the left and he began to focus greater attention on 
entrenched patterns of economic exploitation inside 
U.S. society. America, he said, needed a "revolution 
in values," and on many occasions he suggested that 
there must be a fundamental change in the way that 
society was organized.
Staying with Marable and Mullings, "In the aftermath of 
the creation of the holiday, there has been a tendency 
within popular culture to concentrate almost exclusively 
on this pre-1966 public career. This is not only 
historically dishonest, but an attempt to 'mainstream' 
King to conform to the more conservative standards of 
the current period."
As I stated earlier, it allows the George Bushs of the 
world to sell you the dream.
Before I get into some other things, allow me a few 
minutes to analyze the Dream Speech.
The "dream" reference in the speech, as it has been 
portrayed, twisted, and taken out of context comes 
in the middle of the speech. The speech actually 
opens with Dr. King the realist saying in the second 
paragraph "...we must face the tragic fact that the Negro 
is still languishing in the corners of American society 
and finds himself an exile in his own land. So we have 
come here today to dramatize an appalling condition." 
I say again, to dramatize an appalling condition. That 
was no dream, it was real! It was our reality in America 
in 1963! He refers to the Constitution and the Declaration 
of Independence as a promissory note to which every 
American was to fall heir. Dr. King the pragmatist refers 
to the guaranteed unalienable rights of life, liberty, and 
the pursuit of happiness.
Dr. King says "It is obvious today that America has 
defaulted on this promissory note insofar as her citizens 
of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred 
obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad 
check - a check which has come back marked 'insufficient funds.'
Will President Bush talk about this aspect of the I Have 
A Dream Speech ? I think not. This the actual pretext upon 
which the Dream is based. Nobody wants to discuss this 
fact today. The dream for a day when children can live 
in a nation where they will not be judged by the color 
of their skin but by the content of their character, had 
to be stated as a goal, a vision, a dream, because the 
reality for African Americans or Negros (as we were still 
called back then) was stark and so far removed that vision 
that it could only be a dream.
Dr. King went on to say that they gathered on that spot 
on that day "...to remind America of the fierce urgency of 
now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling 
off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now 
is the time to make real the promises of democracy."
Those are the words of a revolutionary, not a dreamer!
Dr. King prophecies "There will be neither rest nor 
tranquility in America until the Negro is granted his 
citizenship rights. The whirlwinds of revolt will 
continue to shake the foundation of our nation until 
the bright day of justice emerges."
I say again, shake the foundation of our nation until 
the bright day of justice emerges? Again, these are the 
words of a revolutionary not a dreamer! Talk about 
conviction, Mr. President, talk about staying the course, 
Mr. President. That's what we call true resolve.
He goes on for five more paragraphs before 
he gets to "I have a dream."
Dr. King was correct then and it proves to be prophetic now.
We must face the tragic fact that based on the actions 
in Florida and Ohio, and the unethical, immoral and 
unconstitutional actions of the United States Supreme 
Court that the Negro is still languishing in the corners 
of American Democracy; our votes were stolen! It is 
obvious today that America has defaulted on this promise 
of one-man, one-vote.
Is Dr. King relevant today? If so, how? Read "Nonviolence 
and Racial Justice" 6 February 1957 Chicago, Ill.
"It is commonly observed that the crisis in race relations 
dominates the arena of American life. This crisis has been 
precipitated by two factors: the determined resistance of 
reactionary elements in the south to the Supreme Court's 
momentous decision outlawing segregation in the public 
schools, and the radical change in the Negro's evaluation 
of himself While southern legislative halls ring with open 
defiance through "interposition" and "nullification," while 
a modern version of the Klu Klux Klan has arisen in the 
form of "respectable" white citizens' councils, a revolutionary 
change has taken place in the Negro's conception of his own 
nature and destiny. Once he thought of himself as an inferior 
and patiently accepted injustice and exploitation. Those days are gone."
This is very important because Dr. King is now discussing 
the fundamental element of revolution, a people deciding 
for themselves that their circumstance must change. True 
revolution begins with a change of mindset, a shift in 
ones perception of ones-self in the context of that 
individuals (or group of individuals) reality.
"The first Negroes landed on the shores of this 
nation in 1619, one year ahead of the Pilgrim 
Fathers. They were brought here from Africa and, 
unlike the Pilgrims, they were brought against their 
will, as slaves. Throughout the era of slavery the 
Negro was treated in inhuman fashion. He was considered 
a thing to be used, not a person to be respected. He 
was merely a depersonalized cog in a vast plantation 
machine. The famous Dred Scott decision of 1857 well 
illustrates his status during slavery. In this decision 
the Supreme Court of the United States said, in substance, 
that the Negro is not a citizen of the United States; he 
is merely property subject to the dictates of his owner.
Living under these conditions, many Negroes lost faith in 
themselves. They came to feel that perhaps they were less 
than human. So long as the Negro maintained this subservient 
attitude and accepted the 'place' assigned him, a sort of 
racial peace existed. But it was an uneasy peace in which 
the Negro was forced patiently to submit to insult, injustice 
and exploitation. It was a negative peace. True peace is not 
merely the absence of some negative force--tension, confusion 
or war; it is the presence of some positive force--justice, 
good will and brotherhood."
Do you think President Bush, VP Cheney and Secretary 
of State Rice understand that they can not bring peace 
to the Middle East at the barrel of a gun? Peace will 
only come with the presence of some positive force--justice, 
good will and brotherhood.
Continuing with Dr. King, "the determination of Negro 
Americans to win freedom from every form of oppression 
springs from the same profound longing for freedom that 
motivates oppressed peoples all over the world. The 
rhythmic beat of deep discontent in Africa and Asia is 
at bottom a quest for freedom and human dignity on the 
part of people who have long been victims of colonialism. 
The struggle for freedom on the part of oppressed people 
in general and of the American Negro in particular has 
developed slowly and is not going to end suddenly. Privileged 
groups rarely give up their privileges without strong 
resistance. But when oppressed people rise up against 
oppression there is no stopping point short of full 
freedom. Realism compels us to admit that the struggle 
will continue until freedom is a reality for all the 
oppressed peoples of the world."
This is why the Palestinians will not be defeated, this 
is why the US can't win in Iraq. The oppressed peoples 
in Iraq, Palestine, and yes, Iran (if the US is foolish 
enough to go in there) will struggle until the freedom 
by their definition is achieved.
"Hence the basic question which confronts the world's 
oppressed is: How is the struggle against the forces 
of injustice to be waged? There are two possible answers. 
One is resort to the all too prevalent method of physical 
violence and corroding hatred. The danger of this method 
is its futility. Violence solves no social problems; it 
merely creates new and more complicated ones. Through 
the vistas of time a voice still cries to every potential 
Peter, "Put up your sword!" The shores of history are 
white with the bleached bones of nations and communities 
that failed to follow this command. If the American Negro 
and other victims of oppression succumb to the temptation 
of using violence in the struggle for justice, unborn 
generations will live in a desolate night of bitterness, 
and their chief legacy will be an endless reign of chaos."
How does this apply to people of color in America today, 
but how does this apply to the people of the Middle East 
who view America's invasion of their country as renewed 
oppression? Is Dr. King still relevant? If so, how?
When President Bush and Secretary Rice quote Dr. King, 
do you think they will refer to the speech 
Dr. King gave in LA in 1967?
The Casualties of the War in Vietnam 25 February 1967
Los Angeles, Calif.
"In these days of emotional tension when the problems 
of the world are gigantic in extent and chaotic in 
detail, there is no greater need than for sober-thinking, 
healthy debate, creative dissent and enlightened discussion."
Do you think today that the problems of the world are 
gigantic in extent and chaotic in detail?
If I change Viet Nam with Iraq, do you think this makes any sense today?
Contuining with Dr. King "I would like to speak to you 
candidly and forthrightly this afternoon about our present 
involvement in Viet Nam (Iraq). I have chosen as a subject, 
"The Casualties of the War In Viet Nam (Iraq)." We are all 
aware of the nightmarish physical casualties. We see them 
in our living rooms in all of their tragic dimensions on 
television screens, and we read about them on our subway 
and bus rides in daily newspaper accounts. We see the rice 
fields of a small Asian country being trampled at will and 
burned at whim: we see grief-stricken mothers with crying 
babies clutched in their arms as they watch their little 
huts burst forth into flames; we see the fields and valleys 
of battle being painted with humankind's blood; we see the 
broken bodies left prostrate in countless fields; we see 
young men being sent home half-men--physically handicapped 
and mentally deranged. Most tragic of all is the casualty 
list among children. Some one million Vietnamese children 
have been casualties of this brutal war. A war in which 
children are incinerated by napalm, in which American 
soldiers die in mounting numbers while other American 
soldiers, according to press accounts, in unrestrained 
hatred shoot the wounded enemy as they lie on the ground, 
is a war that mutilates the conscience. These casualties 
are enough to cause all men to rise up with righteous 
indignation and oppose the very nature of this war."
The physical casualties of the war in Iraq are not alone 
the catastrophies. The casualties of principles and values 
are equally disastrous and injurious. Indeed, they are 
ultimately more harmful because they are self-perpetuating. 
If the casualties of principle are not healed, the 
physical casualties will continue to mount. The principles 
of civil liberties, right to privacy, true democracy in 
America are no longer valid.
One of the first casualties of the war in Iraq was the 
Charter of the United Nations. In taking armed action 
against Saddam, the United States clearly violated the 
United Nations charter which provides, in Chapter I, Article II (4)
"All members shall refrain in their international relations 
from the threat or use of force against the territorial 
integrity or political independence of any state or in 
any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations."
and in Chapter VII, (39)
"The Security Council shall determine the existence of 
any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of 
aggression, and shall make recommendations or shall decide 
what measures shall be taken... to maintain or restore 
international peace and security."
It is very obvious that our government blatantly 
violated its obligation under the charter of the 
United Nations to submit to the Security Council 
its charge of aggression against North Viet Nam. 
Instead we unilaterally launched an all-out war on 
Asian soil. In the process we have underminded the 
purpose of the United Nations and caused its effectiveness 
to atrophy. We have also placed our nation in the position 
of being morally and politically isolated. Even the long 
standing allies of our nation have adamantly refused to 
join our government in this ugly war. As Americans and 
lovers of Democracy we should carefully ponder the 
consequences of our nation's declining moral status in the world.
As many of you know that "A Time To Break Silence" is 
one of my favorites and the speech that I believe was 
the straw that broke the camels back. This was the 
speech that let the US government know that Dr. King 
had to go. He was assassinated a year to the day that 
this speech was delivered.
Again, replace Vietnam with iraq.
Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break Silence
By Rev. Martin Luther King
4 April 1967
Since I am a preacher by trade, I suppose it is not 
surprising that I have seven major reasons for bringing 
Vietnam (Iraq) into the field of my moral vision. There 
is at the outset a very obvious and almost facile 
connection between the war in Vietnam and the struggle 
I, and others, have been waging in America. A few years 
ago there was a shining moment in that struggle. It seemed 
as if there was a real promise of hope for the poor -- both 
black and white -- through the poverty program. There were 
experiments, hopes, new beginnings. Then came the buildup 
in (Iraq) and I watched the program broken and eviscerated 
as if it were some idle political plaything of a society 
gone mad on war, and I knew that America would never invest 
the necessary funds or energies in rehabilitation of its 
poor so long as adventures like (Iraq) continued to draw 
men and skills and money like some demonic destructive 
suction tube. So I was increasingly compelled to see the 
war as an enemy of the poor and to attack it as such."
Is Dr. King relevant today? If so, how? So I was 
increasingly compelled to see the war as an enemy of 
the poor and to attack it as such. Why was the response 
to Katrina so slow and ineffective? Where are the precious 
limited resources that the people in the Gulf region need 
and why can't this government deliver them? The programs 
to deliver aid to the people in the Gulf region are broken 
and eviscerated as if theywere some idle political 
plaything of a society gone mad on war. I know that 
America can't or won't invest the necessary funds or 
energies in rehabilitation of this region and its poor 
so long as adventures like Iraq continued to draw men 
and skills and money like some demonic destructive suction tube.
"This is the message of the great Buddhist leaders of Vietnam. 
Recently one of them wrote these words:
Each day the war goes on the hatred increases in 
the heart of the Vietnamese and in the hearts of 
those of humanitarian instinct. The Americans are 
forcing even their friends into becoming their enemies. 
It is curious that the Americans, who calculate so 
carefully on the possibilities of military victory, 
do not realize that in the process they are incurring 
deep psychological and political defeat. The image of 
America will never again be the image of revolution, 
freedom and democracy, but the image of violence and militarism."
What has France said, Germany, Russia about America today? 
Do the peoples of Africa and Europe truly believe that 
America is now the land of the free and home of the brave?
"If we continue, there will be no doubt in my mind and in the 
mind of the world that we have no honorable intentions in 
Vietnam (Iraq). It will become clear that our minimal 
expectation is to occupy it as an American colony and 
men will not refrain from thinking that our maximum hope 
is to goad (Iran) into a war so that we may bomb her 
nuclear installations. If we do not stop our war against 
the people of (Iraq) immediately the world will be left 
with no other alternative than to see this as some horribly 
clumsy and deadly game we have decided to play."
In today's Washington Post, "Bush Warns Against Nuclear-Armed Iran."
"Meanwhile we in the churches and synagogues have a continuing 
task while we urge our government to disengage itself from a 
disgraceful commitment. We must continue to raise our voices 
if our nation persists in its perverse ways in Vietnam. We 
must be prepared to match actions with words by seeking out 
every creative means of protest possible."
Where are the black ministers of the mega churches 
in today's Vietnam? Bought off by the conservatives with 
Faith Based Initiative Monies?
"These are the times for real choices and not false 
ones. We are at the moment when our lives must be 
placed on the line if our nation is to survive its 
own folly. Every man of humane convictions must decide 
on the protest that best suits his convictions, but we must all protest."
To demonstrate the lineage in Black revolutionary thought, 
this line takes us back to Henry Highland Garnett in 1843
"Let Your Motto Be Resistance when he states: "...In the 
name of God, we ask, are you men? Where is the blood of 
your fathers? Has it all run out of your veins? Awake, 
awake: millions of voices are calling you! Your dead 
fathers speak to you from their graves. Heaven, as with 
a voice of thunder, calls on you to arise from the dust. 
Let your motto be resistance! Resistance! RESISTANCE! No 
oppressed people have ever secured their liberty without 
resistance. What kind of resistance you had better make, 
you must decide by the circumstances that surround you, 
and according to the suggestion of expediency."
Again, Dr. King said "Every man of humane convictions must 
decide on the protest that best suits his convictions, but 
we must all protest.
There is something seductively tempting about stopping 
there and sending us all off on what in some circles has 
become a popular crusade against the war in Vietnam. I say 
we must enter the struggle, but I wish to go on now to say 
something even more disturbing. The war in Vietnam is but a 
symptom of a far deeper malady within the American spirit, 
and if we ignore this sobering reality we will find ourselves 
organizing clergy- and laymen-concerned committees for the 
next generation. They will be concerned about Guatemala and 
Peru. They will be concerned about Thailand and Cambodia. 
They will be concerned about Mozambique and South Africa. 
We will be marching for these and a dozen other names and 
attending rallies without end unless there is a significant 
and profound change in American life and policy. Such 
thoughts take us beyond Vietnam, but not beyond our calling 
as sons of the living God."
Do ya think President Bush, VP Cheny, or Secretary Rice 
will be quoting this line from Dr. King? If not, why not?
2006-01-19 Thu 20:22:22 cst
NewTrendMag.org