Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
christianmarine said:I thought funerals were to honor a person, not politics.
If a persons life was devoted to political issues, then she can be honored with her lifes work, no? How could you honor Mrs. King without mentioning politics? Kinda like honoring a fallen policeman by mentioning his work with the force and service to the community.christianmarine said:I thought funerals were to honor a person, not politics.
Yup, although at the time it's certain that J. Edgar Hoover was far more responsible then they were - frankly they didn't even know (one of the reasons the CIA was split out of the FBI was the power of the FBI). Thank you for poking even more holes into an OP that's already riddled with them.ballfan said:"It was difficult for them personally with the civil liberties of both husband and wife violated, and they became the targets of secret government wiretapping and other surveillance," Carter said.
That would have been the liberals Kennedy and Johnson he was referring to wouldn't it?
If it turns out that these latest revelations prove that there really was WMD in Iraq, do you suppose the good Reverend will apologize to Bush?JustOneWay said:Ya, Reverend Dr. Joseph Lowery was great!
can that guy work a crowd, or what!
"We know now there were no weapons of mass destruction over there [standing ovation]... but Coretta kew and we know that there are weapons of misdirection right down here. Millions without health insurance. Poverty aounds. For war billions more but no more for the poor." -Reverend Dr. Joseph Lowery, at the Coretta Scott King funeral, in front of 4 presidents....
Wouldn't it have been a tremendous opportunity for Ted Kennedy to step up to the podium and apologize to the King family for that extensive monitoring carried out by the Kennedy family?christalee4 said:The Martin Luther Kings would have been very against the current policies of this administration, in terms of boosting up bills for defense companies, and reducing programs for minorities, the elderly, Medicare, student college aid, and so on.
Martin Luther King, as well as Mrs. Coretta, probably would have been on the wiretap list, as well as many other liberal black church leaders, because of their views. In fact, the FBI used to monitor Mr. King extensively, because of his antiwar views during Vietnam
Do you have a list of people you expect to attend your funeral whom you would like to have insulted during the eulogy?loriersea said:And who she was as a person was intimately tied to her political work.
If, at my funeral, nothing the slightest bit political was said, then I'd think that the people there didn't know me very well.
Alarum said:Yup, although at the time it's certain that J. Edgar Hoover was far more responsible then they were - frankly they didn't even know
Wiretaps, which were initially approved by Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, were maintained on Dr. King's home telephone from October 1963 until mid-1965
The Johnson Administration's willingness to permit the FBI to continue its investigation of Dr. King also appears to have involved political considerations. Bill Moyers, President Johnson's assistant, testified that sometime around the spring of 1965 President Johnson "seemed satisfied that these allegations about Martin Luther King were not founded." Yet President Johnson did not order the investigation terminated
Ha ha, where have you been? WMDs had nothing to do with the invasion, before, during, or after.MachZer0 said:If it turns out that these latest revelations prove that there really was WMD in Iraq, do you suppose the good Reverend will apologize to Bush?
Unfortunately, you don't seem to have followed the discussion. the topic was not the invasion of Iraq, but rather the Reverend Lowrey's comments at thge King memorialDoctrine1st said:Ha ha, where have you been? WMDs had nothing to do with the invasion, before, during, or after.
All testimony before Congress is sworn, so taking the oath is just ceremonial dressingDoctrine1st said:You know, if the GOP controlled oversight committees actually did their jobs, and even when they wish to put on the appearance of doing their jobs, actually insist on sworn testimony before them, then the minority party and individuals who care, wouldn't have to hold events such as off record meetings in the basement of congress, or make statement in the public forum sooooo much.
Yes, Rev Lowrey was commenting on Iraq, at the service, and was spot on. I'm stating agreement, while at the same time trying reinterate reality to you. The person and person's who need to make real apologies may do it on their death bed, or perhaps never. As for Rummy, maybe on his death bed. Bush and Rove, probably never.MachZer0 said:Unfortunately, you don't seem to have followed the discussion. the topic was not the invasion of Iraq, but rather the Reverend Lowrey's comments at thge King memorial
MachZer0 said:If it turns out that these latest revelations prove that there really was WMD in Iraq, do you suppose the good Reverend will apologize to Bush?
Which doesn't address my question. There are two sources now that are shedding light on the fact that Iraq did indeed have WMD. If those sources prove reliable, revealing the exisence of WMD in Iraq, do you think the Reverend owes Bush an apology?Doctrine1st said:Yes, Rev Lowrey was commenting on Iraq, at the service, and was spot on. I'm stating agreement, while at the same time trying reinterate reality to you. The person and person's who need to make real apologies may do it on their death bed, or perhaps never. As for Rummy, maybe on his death bed. Bush and Rove, probably never.
Yes, folks do have the right to freely make fools of themselves. What a country!JustOneWay said:What I suppose is irrelevent. It really is the Reverend's decision now, isn't it? Why don't you ask him, MZ.
I thought it was a great eulogy. The Reverend's words were heartfelt, and very witty.
Freedom of speech is great, isn't it?
I don't know, for many in America it seems that lying under oath is a far more greater crime then lying to justify a war. I stand corrected.MachZer0 said:All testimony before Congress is sworn, so taking the oath is just ceremonial dressing
Please, enlighten me with these two sources because I want to hold dear the idea that we sent soldiers to die for a valid rational. You can PM me if you wish.MachZer0 said:Which doesn't address my question. There are two sources now that are shedding light on the fact that Iraq did indeed have WMD. If those sources prove reliable, revealing the exisence of WMD in Iraq, do you think the Reverend owes Bush an apology?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?