concerning the philosophy of MLK and non violent resistance. the FBI will release the documents concerning the movement in 2024. Most of us will live to see the release of this information. It will prove without a doubt that MLK was not committed to the philosophy of non violence and was in fact using it as a public relations stunt for a movement that was committed to violent revolution. many of my generation have been indoctrinated into the philosophy of MLK, but in a little over a decade we will see that in fact the FBI and CIA were interested in furthering the flawed propaganda of MLK because they used it as a means to control populations to this day. MLK was a lot more dynamic then most historians have given him credit for and it is a great irony that a charade that he used to further a very worthy cause was eventually used to subdue that same cause for half a century. justice, freedom and the right to live in dignity are not accomplished with non violence. it is only through revolutionary struggle that the rights articulated in our constitution are upheld. It is very sad to see how much abuse is done in the name of non violence. it would of been impossible for MLK to of known that his own revolutionary charade would of been used against him after his death.
The wicked witch of Beirut nowadays talks to anyone who would listen. Literally, anyone.
On a side note, Playboy must be in REAL need these days, to engage a beauty of Helen Thomas’ caliber.
(Haaretz) Helen Thomas, former dean of the White House Press Corps, reportedly told Playboy in an interview for their April issue that Jews have power over the White House and Congress, who are in the pockets of the Israeli lobbies.
Thomas left her post at the White House after she publicly made anti-Israel comments last May, telling the Jews they should “get the hell out of Palestine.”
The former reporter told Playboy that the Israeli lobbies “are funded by wealthy supporters, including those from Hollywood. Same thing with the financial markets. There’s total control.”
When asked about her comments that ultimately cost her her job, Thomas told Playboy that “everybody knows my feelings about the Palestinians,” adding “sure, the Israelis have a right to exist—but where they were born, not to come and take someone else’s home. I’ve had it up to here with the violations against the Palestinians. Why shouldn’t I say it? I knew exactly what I was doing—I was going for broke. I had reached the point of no return. You finally get fed up.”
Thomas also clarified that when she said the Jews should go back to Poland,Germany and America, that she was not referring to the concentration camps, but rather that “they should stay where they are because they’re not being persecuted—not since World War II, not since 1945.”
However, when asked about the Holocaust, Thomas told the magazine that “there’s nothing wrong with remembering it [the Holocaust], but why do we have to constantly remember? We’re not at fault.”
She then launched into criticism of Israel and its alleged oppression of the Palestinians, accusing the Jews of lacking introspection.
“Do the Jews ever look at themselves?” asked Thomas, “why are they always right? Because they have been oppressed throughout history, I know. And they have this persecution. That’s true, but they shouldn’t use that to dominate.”
The former reporter told Playboy that she is not anti-Jewish, just anti – Israel, saying she thinks Jews are wonderful people. :I’m not anti-Jewish,” clarified Thomas, “I’m anti-Zionist. I am anti Israel taking what doesn’t belong to it. If you have a home and you’re kicked out of that home, you don’t come and kick someone else out.”
Kieron Monks is a reporter and editor for Palestine Monitor. He’s written pieces in the publication accusing “Zionist lobbies” of “smearing” such heroic figures as Noam Chomsky and Norman Finkelstein. Finkelstein, it should be noted, asserts that the Holocaust has been exaggerated and exploited by Jews to justify Israeli human rights violations and crimes against humanity, and supported Hezbollah’s “armed resistance against the Israeli Army in Lebanon.” In the same essay, Monks accuses the Jewish people of having transitioned from “oppressed” to “oppressor”, and – even more shamefully – accuses Jewish groups of desperately ”digging deeper for evidence of their victim-hood.”
In another piece for Palestine Monitor, entitled “Human Currency”, in 2009, he argues that Palestinians should not negotiate with Israel, and that force is the only thing which Israelis understand.
So, with such a prolific anti-Israel pedigree, and palpable hostility towards the Jewish community, I wasn’t surprised to see that Comment is Free recently published his essay, on Nov. 19, Palestine aid models must change.
It was these five words in the following passage that initially got my attention:
“The impact of foreign interests can be clearly seen in PA budgets that allocate 10 times more money to security – suppressing resistance to the occupation – than to agriculture, which could be the backbone of the Palestinian economy.”
This passage really caught my eye. With language, context is everything, but, given his past commentary, its seems clear that it should be read as criticism of the Palestinian security forces attempts to combat extremism, violence, and terrorism against Israelis – a minimal requirement for coexistence in the region. The words “resistance to the occupation” often are a thinly veiled euphemism for the right to “armed resistance.”
Another passage in his essay lends support to my conclusions. He says:
Individual NGOs have attempted to assert their independence from donors. Many reject USAID funding due to its political demands, which preclude assistance for projects that could benefit people with affiliations to undesirable political groups. The Dalia Association has introduced a “Village Decides” scheme, focused on institution building, which empowers local communities to invest funding as they see fit, without conditions.
Of course, Monks fails to inform his readers what he means by “undesirable political groups.” He’s referring to U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) guidelines requiring NGOs receiving funds to pledge “not to promote or engage in violence, terrorism, bigotry, or the destruction of any state, nor … make sub-grants to any entity that engages in these activities.”
In the mind of Kieron Monks, requirements that NGOs – who ostensibly are trying to promote peace and human rights in the region – shouldn’t promote terrorism or anti-Semitism are, naturally, a betrayal of the revolution.
Monks – who fetsishizes violent resistance by the most reactionary political movements, and peddles hateful narratives about Jews, yet still styles himself a brave progressive voice – is the perfect embodiment of the Guardian’s consistent betrayal of true liberal values.
There was a time when liberal papers (like the Guardian) were at the forefront in the fight against anti-Semitism. There was a time when such papers could be relied upon to be in fierce opposition to totalitarianism and unwavering in their defense of democracies – and never mistook the former for the latter. And, there was a time when liberal papers would see through the thin veneer of folks such as Kieron Monks and see him as the reactionary that he is.
I long for the return of that kind of crusading and fearless liberal voice in the UK.
the real sign that things are turning in Israel’s favor is that the creativity and innovative thinking of their enemy is gone. At least back in the day they were inventing so called “facts on the ground”. Listening to this guy you would think he was plagiarizing a dead man named Edward Said. These academics don’t have anything new to add or any intellectual discourse to travel.
there was a poll recently taken in the Arab world about their thoughts about Palestinians. the poll showed sincere disinterest. I don’t believe the Arabs have stopped their bigotry and violence towards Jews… it is certainly still there… but I also think there is a certain quality of boredom because their leadership is just not creative enough to convince their population to care. The flotilla was dangerous because it did create a victimization narrative… but it was easily exposed.
this character in the Arab media is exactly why Bibi should ignore Obama. We have the upper hand. It isn’t that people are siding with us… but rather the Islamic world is so corrupt, chaotic and killing themselves… that they just don’t have the interest to actually attack Israel… at least the common man on the street.
As for Hezbollah and the unpopular now Hamas…. these armies can be dealt with if Israel wants to. Sadly the Jews have never been the type to go for the knockout punch. Right now Israel’s largest threat is from within. There are too many Jews who are brainwashed by Obama… but the actual man on the street Arab threat can be dealt with if Israel has the Chutzpah
sadly if Bibi deals with Obama this situation could change… and in a year the entire Arab Moral could change as well when in 1 year, 1 month and 1 week Obama will allow the UN to create a country breaking the laws of the mandate of Palestine which says no outside power can decide borders within the are without the consensus of the people within the land.
one of the reasons Obama is making this honey pot trap is because it is a hail Mary pass. I hope Bibi is wise enough to see it for it is and build homes as much as he can