Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Dr. King's Dream for the Global Strike Team

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 02:51 PM
link   
In a truly disgusting piece of Orwellian propaganda the Air Force Global Strike Command has brazenly claimed that Dr. Martin Luther King would be proud of the U.S. military and it's huge arsenals of death.


Dr. King would be proud to see our Global Strike team - comprised of Airmen, civilians and contractors from every race, creed, background and religion - standing side-by-side ensuring the most powerful weapons in the U.S. arsenal remain the credible bedrock of our national defense. . . Our team must overlook our differences to ensure perfection as we maintain and operate our weapon systems. . . Maintaining our commitment to our Global Strike team, our families and our nation is a fitting tribute to Dr. King as we celebrate his legacy.



Completely in opposition to what MLK actually stood for with his anti-war message. This is the man who said the U.S. government was "the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today.".

An incredibly prophetic and prescient speech he gave on April 4th 1967 one year before his assassination sums it all up.



He clearly decries the war in Vietnam and speak of "the deadly Western arrogance that has poisoned the international atmosphere for so long."


This is the man who was (prior to his assassination) planning a Poor People's Campaign. A march on Washington comprising of all the disaffected, blacks, whites, Natives, Hispanics and they were going to camp outside Congress until the U.S. government made serious efforts to give people true economic and human rights.

This is Orwellian in the extreme. Next they'll be trying to tell us that Gandhi would have approved of the West's actions in Afghanistan and Iraq.

It's quite clear that the United States celebrates a national holiday of a man who's views and principles were the complete antithesis of the governments. I find it even more reprehensible and truly hypocritical that President Obama swore his oath at his inauguration upon the bible of Martin Luther King as well as Abraham Lincoln's.

If Martin Luther King was alive today he would be roundly denounced as a terrorist agitator and at the extreme would probably be incarcerated.

Here is a link to the Guardian article by Glenn Greenwald, which made me aware of this alarming piece of revisionist propaganda. If you scroll down the article you will also see a screenshot of the U.S. Marines Twitter account who posted on the same day the Martin Luther King quote:

"A man who won't die for something is not fit to live"

Guardian

Guardian 2

I didn't think the U.S. government and it's military could sink any lower, but misappropriating MLK's anti-war message is truly heinous. From the message he espoused it's why I find it very difficult to believe that MLK was killed by James Earl Ray.


Here is a shorter more powerful version of MLK's speech. Actually an excerpt from the documentary War Made Easy












edit on 1-23-2013 by Springer because: Edited title to more accurately reflect the content




posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 02:52 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 02:55 PM
link   
if he were still alive he would feel great sadness for the world we live in today, he would very much not be proud of our nation or especially our military warmongering government.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 02:58 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 03:01 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Kram09
 
It obvious from the very start that he is referring only to the equality and/or desegregation now prevalent in the military.

After that point, it is where you go off on your angst filled rant.

edit on 23-1-2013 by inivux because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 03:10 PM
link   
reply to post by inivux
 





It obvious from the very start that he is referring only to the equality and/or desegregation now prevalent in the military.


What are you saying? That he was against desegregation in the military? In the speech he denounces the U.S. war in Vietnam and U.S. militarism. That is quite clear.





After that point, it is where you go off on your angst filled rant.



Angst filled rant? So what I said was neither relevant nor correct then? So Martin Luther King would have been a staunch supporter of U.S. militarism and aggression?


edit on 23/1/13 by Kram09 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 03:13 PM
link   
Good post. I don't think the good Dr. would be pleased with our military's mission today, even if it is integrated.

One other thing I think he'd be pretty peeved about is the fact that today a young black man has a 37% chance of being in prison, and only a 26% chance of having a job.

Or that black men are incarcerated at a rate of 3,074 per 100,000 residents, and white men are incarcerated at 459 per 100,000. 3,074 vs 459!!!


www.prb.org...

I'm glad to see people talking about Dr. King right now.
If anyone is interested, I wrote this one before school this morning. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by ZeroReady
 





Good post. I don't think the good Dr. would be pleased with our military's mission today, even if it is integrated.


I think he would be aghast at what the United States has become and I think he would be bitterly disappointed in Obama whose comparisons with MLK don't go beyond the fact of them having the same colour skin.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Kram09
 
I'll spell it out for you.

MLK was a supporter of desegregation and equality.
The military is now racially desegregated, and racially "equal".
Thus, MLK would be proud of the desegregation and equality.
Thus, the statement made by the military official.

What happened next, was you taking something out of context, as an excuse to get on your tiny little angsty soapbox.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 03:23 PM
link   
I'll re-quote the statement made by the military official, and highlight the relevant parts.



Dr. King would be proud to see our Global Strike team - comprised of Airmen, civilians and contractors from every race, creed, background and religion - standing side-by-side ensuring the most powerful weapons in the U.S. arsenal remain the credible bedrock of our national defense. . . Our team must overlook our differences to ensure perfection as we maintain and operate our weapon systems. . . Maintaining our commitment to our Global Strike team, our families and our nation is a fitting tribute to Dr. King as we celebrate his legacy.
edit on 23-1-2013 by inivux because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by inivux
 





Thus, MLK would be proud of the desegregation and equality.


Oh really?

Even though the military was desegregated when he made that speech?

So just because the military was desegregated he would be proud? Proud that that same desegregated military has been used in shameful wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were countless innocents have been killed and U.S. troops have taken part in shameful episodes which amount to war crimes?

Nothing much to be proud of...



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by inivux
 


Regardless of the fact that the military is now fully desegregated, Dr. King would be vehemently opposed to the wanton killing of civilians, torture, and unnecessary violence practiced by our multi-ethnic military.

He was passionately non-violent (So far as I know. I'm not trying to speak for him) and would not condone the way the military functions. He wanted an end to violence. Does anyone even know how many wars the US is fighting right now?



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Kram09
 
The official's statement was clearly in reference to desegregation, obviously due to MLK's recent birthday.

Anything beyond that, is clearly your own juvenile, "anti-establishment" bias.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 03:36 PM
link   
I'll try another approach.


In a truly disgusting piece of Orwellian propaganda the Air Force Global Strike Command has brazenly claimed that Dr. Martin Luther King would be proud of the U.S. military and it's huge arsenals of death.

No, he/they didn't say that at all. What you did there, was take something out of context then sensationalize it.

What was actually said, you quoted. Taking into consideration the context of when the statement was made, it is more about racial equality and desegregation, than it is about the Imperialism and warmongering this Country perpetuates.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by inivux
 





Anything beyond that, is clearly your own juvenile, "anti-establishment" bias.


Juvenile how? Juvenile because I happen to say something you disagree with?

My point is Martin Luther King is being celebrated by an institution whose whole ethos and meaning for existence is in complete contrast to his views and the things he stood for.

So the fact that the U.S. military is desegregated would somehow make MLK proud and quietly ignore the facts of U.S. aggression and current wars?



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 03:41 PM
link   
So they're trying to say there's no racism in the military anymore, LMAO.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Kram09
 
Juvenile based on your perceived online persona ("V for Vendetta" references), and your ability to take a simple statement, and made it into something it is not.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 03:45 PM
link   
reply to post by inivux
 





Maintaining our commitment to our Global Strike team, our families and our nation is a fitting tribute to Dr. King as we celebrate his legacy.


A commitment to a "Global Strike Team."

Global. Strike. Team.

A team which can strike globally...

Truly lovely....it doesn't matter if we're killing people in wars because we're all in it together, all colours and creeds.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by inivux
 





Juvenile based on your perceived online persona ("V for Vendetta" references


Please explain to us here why any reference to V for Vendetta should be deemed juvenile and why you are using a person's avatar to make a judgement upon them and their thread?

Incidentally have you even read V for Vendetta? I suspect you haven't...

This is wholly irrelevant to the topic of this thread.
edit on 23/1/13 by Kram09 because: (no reason given)






top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join