Why is the MSM so concerned with the so called "Rev. Wright issue", but not concerned with the fact that Ambassador Peck said it first? Calling him anti America, Rev Wright has served this country. Why hasn't the MSM commented on the words spoken by Pat Buchanan? Did anyone watch Bill Maher on Fri 3/28? Bill quoted a statement by Pat Buchanan in response to Barack's speech on racism. He said "blacks should be happy, they don't have anything to complain about. America has been good to them. They got welfare, section 8 housing, and they got to come over on a big ship". Is it just me, or is this man is clearly CRAZY!! Why hasn't anyone pointed out the obvious...if Sen. Clinton can't manage her OWN campaign funds, how can anyone expect her to balance the deficit? Is she just going to write a check and bail us all out of debt? Sen. Clinton speaks about her experience but what about her life experience what does she truly have in common with the "common people"? When asked what she has specifically done for black America all Sen. Clinton can say is "she has a plan for healthcare". Yeah Rocky never gave up but he also got his butt kicked while he was in the ring!
40 Years Later, (The Late) Martin Luther King Still Silenced
Buzz this article up.
Soon after Martin Luther King's birthday became a federal holiday in 1986, I began prodding mainstream media to cover the dramatic story of King's last year as he campaigned militantly against U.S. foreign and economic policy. Most of his last speeches were recorded. But year after year, corporate networks have refused to air the tapes.
Last night NBC Nightly anchor Brian Williams enthused over new color footage of King that adorned its coverage of the 40th anniversary of the assassination. The report focused on the last phase of King's life. But the same old blinders were in place.
NBC showed young working class whites in Chicago taunting King. But there was no mention of how elite media had taunted King in his last year. In 1967 and '68, mainstream media saw Rev. King a bit like they now see Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
Back then they denounced King's critical comments; today they simply silence them.
While noting in passing that King spoke out against the Vietnam War, mainstream reports today rarely acknowledge that he went way beyond Vietnam to decry U.S. militarism in general: "I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos," said King in 1967 speeches on foreign policy, "without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today -- my own government."
In response to these speeches, Newsweek said King was "over his head" and wanted a "race-conscious minority" to dictate U.S. foreign policy. Life magazine described the Nobel Peace Prize winner as a communist pawn who advocated "abject surrender in Vietnam." The Washington Post couldn't have been more patronizing: "King has diminished his usefulness to his cause, to his country, and to his people."
When King's moral voice moved beyond racial discrimination to international issues, the New York Times attacked his efforts to link the civil rights and antiwar movements.
King's sermons on Vietnam could get as angry as those of Barack Obama's ex-pastor: "God didn't call America to engage in a senseless, unjust war . . .We've committed more war crimes almost than any nation in the world."
In 1967, King was also criticizing the economic underpinnings of U.S. foreign policy, railing against "capitalists of the West investing huge sums of money in Asia, Africa and South America, only to take the profits out with no concern for the social betterment of the countries." Today, capitalists of the West reap huge profits from their domination of global media.
Thankfully, we now have the Internet and independent media outlets where King's later speeches are available for the ages.
If King had survived to hear the war drums beating for the invasion and occupation of Iraq -- amplified by TV networks and the New York Times front page and Washington Post editorial page -- there's little doubt where he'd stand. Or how loudly he'd be speaking out.
And there's little doubt how big U.S. media would have reacted. On Fox News and talk radio, King would have been Dixie Chicked...or Rev. Wrighted. In corporate centrist outlets, he'd have been marginalized faster than you can say Noam Chomsky.
One suspects King would be marveling at the rise of Barack Obama and the multiracial movement behind him. But would he be happy with Obama and other Democratic leaders who heap boundless billions onto the biggest military budget in world history?
In 1967, King denounced a Democratic-controlled Congress for fattening the Pentagon budget while cutting anti-poverty programs, declaring: "A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death."
Jeff Cohen is an associate professor of journalism at Ithaca College, and founding director of the Park Center for Independent Media. He founded the media watch group FAIR in 1986.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Finally. The voice of reason speaks. Thank you for your advocacy, your efforts to hold the Fourth Estate accountable to their purpose, and to your tribute to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and to Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
What I would ask the media AND many of the righteous indignation bloggers opposed to Rev. Wright's oratory is this: Have you ever attended for years a Southern Baptist Sunday School, Training Union, Wednesday Prayer Meetings, Funerals, Southern Baptist Revivals?
Imagine a hillbilly (I use this perjoratively) attending an Opera for the first time. Imagine the shock:
"Too loud. Too strange. Too dramatic. Too angry, violent. Words I don't understand. Sure scary when they screech so high. Not what I'm used to. No fiddles, moonshine jugs, wax-paper combs, kazoos or washboards. Don't they know the right way to be American?"
This has every thing to do with dislike, deep, disturbing, distasteful, dislike. Dis~ like. Rev. King and Rev. Wright's oratories were very different. One was sing-songy and oddly cadenced. One was fiery and in your face. The words were the same. The delivery is alien to most Caucasians as if hillbillys at the Opera. Bottom line: King and Wright had/have First Amendment "rights" to say anything they want.
Attend a Southern Baptist Church. Caucasian or American-African. Listen to the delivery. It's supposed to "scare the HELL out of you" and often, it does.
While many are complaining about past statements by Jeremiah Wright, I think some might want to consider the words and deeds of Republican darlings Pat Robertson and John Hagee.
Pat Robertson's conflict diamond and gold dealings with brutal African dictators should enrage decent human beings and maybe even Neocon Republican Christians. The late Mobutu Sese Seko of the former Zaire in 1993 and more recently, longtime Liberian warlord / president Charles Taylor were two of Robertson's business partners. In 2003 Taylor was charged with war crimes for funding the Revolutionary United Front "rebels" in Sierra Leone. Even then, Pat Robertson supported him. Republicans should be ashamed to accept any money from Robertson.
Now we have Senator McCain's new supporter John Hagee, leader of the small but hateful Talibaptist contingent of the Southern Baptist Church, a church to which Mr. McCain belongs when he's not an Episcopalian. I doubt that one would have to scratch Mr. Hagee too deeply to find a Klansman.
Are the congregations of these "Godly" men responsible for their leaders' words or actions? Do Robertson's contributors have the blood of mutilated African civilians on their hands because they were dumb enough to give money to a wealthy prayerasite? Does Hatin' Hagee the speak for most Southern Baptists?
The Republican Party should quit taking money and spreading ignorance from Robertson and Hagee; only then can they criticize Mr. Obama's pastor for something that Mr. Obama himself did not say.
This is an excellent, insightful piece of work.
I have commented on this above. I know that Dr. King was no stranger
to criticism of his government. I believe that he would abhor the
state terror of Palestinians by the State of Israel backed by
the US.
For info about Jewish Voice for Peace (an organization of about
20,000 Jews, Muslims, Christians, and Other contact:
www.jvp.org
For one of many articles re: Wright and Obama read Alexander
Cockburn in "The Nation", April 14.
For in depth history and analysis read:
l. "The Fateful Triangle" by Noam Chomsky
2."Perilous Power" by Noam Chomsky and Gilbert Achcar
Former member, SCLC (a follower not a leader)
Member: Jewish Voice for Peace
I am reminded of a scene in the sci-fi book Dune.
A man spits on the floor before the Duke.
The Duke's guards are outraged, but the Duke motions them back.
In a land sorely lacking in water, he realizes this is a sign of profound respect, and returns the compliment.
Patriotism, too, can be interpreted on deeper levels -- should flag-waving amidst the inequities and suffering of others (have we forgotten the people of New Orleans?) not be viewed as equally unamerican? Wasn't blind national patriotism the power source for Adolf Hitler?
Dr.King and Rev.Wright were not, after all, preaching for violence and terrorism. Quite the opposite -- both risked their lives and devoted their lives to fighting so that our sons and daughters might inherit a better America.
Spit on the floor is sometimes merely an invitation to dialog.
Rev.Wright's comments, like Dr.Kings, have succeeded in opening a dialog.
And, it pains me to admit that on some level, Fox News has merely returned the favor.
When viewed as a bizzarre ritual of mutual respect, there is a real opportunity here to redeem ourselves -- through dialog.
Otherwise, just more spit on the floor.
Re the 40yr anniversary of MLK's death, I think Barak Obama made an extremely tasteless decision by not showing up as both Clinton and McCain candidates did. This is his SECOND faux-pas with the Black community ....the first being his not showing up at the convention of celebrity Blacks (the name of the C-SPAN televised, day-long meeting fails me) in New Orleans earlier this year. It included journalists, politicians, entertainers, businessmen. Surprizingly and well commended! was the almost late arrival of Hillary Clinton. But CAME SHE DID. Barak, on the other hand had his campaigning to do - - - as though Clinton didn't.
I was disappointed in him .........as I was today for MLK anniversary. SHAME ON YOU BARAK ! (Shall we make it a third time?)
As a member of the "Black community" I don't see it as a faux-pas at all. Why is he expected to do certain things because he's black. He recognized MLKs assassination yesterday, and more importantly, he has recognized MLK on days that had nothing to do with MLK.
Your referring to the State of Black America.
I see nothing wrong with Obama campaigning. Lets not act like Clinton and McCain are great people that have been celebrating MLK's death in years 39, 38, etc. Its all self serving on their parts. This is an election year.
Let's get real!. Why should Barack Obama have to defend his pastor or his church for words spoken, not by him, but another person. Who, by the way, did not confer with Mr. Obama before he preached that sermon. How many people called for a Catholic politician to reply to the pedophilia rampant in the Catholic priesthood? And, by the same token, how many Catholics deserted their church after these abominable acts were brought to the attention of the world? How do you jusify holding one person to a higher standard and not be similarly outraged at the other, more offensive behavior?
Are you aware of any priests who were advocating for child molestation from the pulpit? Rev. Wright advocates for racial hatred and anti-Americanism from the pulpit. There is the difference. Obama's problem is of his own making.
YellerDog...there isn't a problem, you are trying to make one. Most of what Rev. Wright said is true and what MLK said is also true. Face the truth and quit the hypocrisy. Anyway, since when is anyone responsible for what someone else says?
Wonderful post - a fine tribute Dr. King and Rev. Wright.
Nice Try Cohen. But Pastor Right is NOOOO Martin Luther King Jr. I never once heard MLK make an Anti Semitic remark. Wake up pal.
The tragedy of this whole situation with Rev Wright is that the media only chose to focus on the three words: "God Damn America". Whatever your ultimate opinion may be, watch the whole video before criticizing Wright. He served as part of the marines for many years. Most of what he said was true, except that in American, we're still in denial. Like Obama said, why would the current generation feel any sense or guilt or resposibility for what the previous generation did? I'm a semite and I didn't find most of what Wright said offensive. And if there there were anything offensive, I'm willing to cut him some slack on the count that he has lived through those times and in his mind, the events and emotions are still raw and real.
Anyways, here is the whole speech. As you can see, Wright is critcizing America because of our despicable foreign policy and he does so by saying "god damn america". Of course, it's not meant in a general way. What if a German pastor says God Damn Germany for WWII, nazis, hitler etc but you only heard God Damn Germany?
http://youtube.com/watch?v=aYahF-ClGzw
Neither did Rev./Dr. Wright. What he said about Israel's treatment of Palestanians is true. Even moderate Jews disagree with Israels' apartheid and inhumane actions.
Rev. Wright spoke the truth, very much like Dr. King and should be applauded for having the courage to speak out against what most decent thinking people in America is saying.
You need to educate yourself regarding your country's foreign policy. You can start by viewing:
www:antipasministries.com or read the many books that have been written by historians about your government's criminal behaviour througout the world.
Rev/Dr. Wright served in the Marines and the Navy, did you?
Lay off the man.
"You know, Jesus reminded us in a magnificent parable one day that a man went to hell because he didn't see the poor. ¦ And I come by here to say that America, too, is going to hell, if we don't use her wealth. If America does not use her vast resources of wealth to end poverty, to make it possible for all of God's children to have the basic necessities of life, she, too, will go to hell."
MLK, Jr. - two weeks before he died
If you don't realize the difference between MLK, Jr. and Rev. Wright, there is not much I can say to disabuse you of that ignorance. Dr. King's rhetoric is on the level of Plato. Wright is more akin to graffiti. Comparing King to Wright is like comparing Ghandi to Apu on The Simpsons. There is no comparison between a truly inspiring leader and a walking stereotype.
During King's time, it was actually his rhetoric that offended many white Americans, and few, if any of them, would have then described it as "on the level of Plato." Apparently, you are looking at Dr. King from a historical perspective, in the context of the greatness that has been duly attributed to him over time. However, in the years before his death, particularly in the early years of the Movement, Dr. King was shrouded in the same hatred and revulsion with which Reverend Wright is shrouded today. Some of the politicians and news commentators who now speak so glowingly of Dr. King's leadership, are the same people who castigated Dr. King forty years ago, defining him much like Reverend Wright is defined today as anti-American and racially divisive. For some Americans today who give honor to King's name, they had once called him by the name of "Martin Lucifer," or "Martin Coon." The ignorance that Dr. King confronted almost a half-century ago still exists today, and it becomes most apparent by those who are in denial about the history of our country. For them, truth becomes toxic, and those who speak truth become the enemy. The rhetoric of Dr. King and Reverend Wright was vastly different in content and delivery, but they both spoke of the same truth and they both criticized the same injustices. The only other distinction between them is that one is dead, and the other one is alive.
I was there. I remember. Do you?
I remember. I joined several organizations and tried to make a difference. I voted in every presidential election until '96. I'm tired and discouraged and worried. I wish Rev.King were here to inspire people.
You sound like those I heard criticizing Martin Luther King, Jr. back in the '60's. Do you remember? I do.
Thank you for this thoughtful piece.
Whenever I think of Martin Luther King Jr., I also think of John Coltrane. Both men in the final phases of their lives chose to work with difficult, human spiritual matters. The marginalization of Dr. King's work against the Vietnam war and for economic justice makes those who praise him as a noble symbol, rather than a living force for change, quite uncomfortable. The same can be said of John Coltrane, whose music was considered demanding and difficult, when he decided to literally "play his way over to the other side". Acknowledging the greatness of these endeavors would mean admitting that most of us suffer from a shallow perception of ultimate, metaphysical reality. Great souls help humankind to recognize that we indeed do have a soul. Truly, a remarkable accomplishment.
Whats all the fuss about? As a white man I am glad that Rev. Wright teaches I am evil. Though Ive never met anyone associated with him, never done anything bigoted to black people, and wasn't even alive during the turmoil of the 60's, I know that I am the reason for Rev. Wright and his congregations problems.
He courageously speaks the truth; God does not love me because I'm white, but rather views me as the enemy. Jesus taught us not to love all of God's children, but to separate people based on skin color and ferment anger toward each other. I agree with Jesus and Rev. Wright that skin color really matters on how holy you are. Whites have only contributed evil to this country. The only question left is where can I get a skin color change?
I am glad that no one here is focusing on the content of whats being said. That is a waste of time and dangerous. It leads to judgment of the persons' ideas and hurt feelings. This blog is great that we stay focused on whats important, feelings. How does this all make us feel? Feel good?
I want to be like the white people on this blog who aren't evil/guilty. If I feel really nice about race and don't consider actually what is being said or taught, can I be absolved of the race crimes and bigotry I didn't commit?
gator: No offense intended, but if mere soundbites, taken out of context solely to serve a political agenda, can make you feel like this, then you may want to consider counseling.
It's hard to imagine how you would have reacted to Dr. King's words which were spoken from a much larger pulpit than the one at Trinity United Church of Christ ... but after reading your post, maybe it's not very difficult to imagine after all.
Good heavens!! Where in the world did you get these ideas?!
It appears we have much more work to do on the racism issue than I'd realized!!
You have no understanding whatsoever of what Rev. Wright spoke of.
Apparently he's now feels victimized by the big scary ole black man from Chicago Rev. Jeremiah Wright, after having been forced to listen to those clips over and over and over again. Aww... poor fellah.
Perhaps when all this is over he might come out of retirement to make nice and do a buck dance (with a big smile on his face) for Geraldine Ferraro and the rest of the bigots on Fox News.
You are the one that is not focusing on the content of what is being said.
You completely extrapolated a point that was never uttered from that mans mouth.
If you say that a country that discriminates against a group of people based on race is racist, that doesn't make you a racist. It makes you a truth-teller.
But as Obama said, Rev. Wright problem was that he preached from a place where no progress was made at all. As though the USA was still run by bigots and segregationist.
You can decry Rev. Wright for that, if you would like.
Comparing Wright to King is a MAJOR INSULT to King's legacy.
As all good religionists and statists know, dead saints are the most useful kind, as you can turn them into anything you want. Sure, everyone is doing obeissance to King's memory today. And the Catholic Church waited 500 years to canonize Joan of Arc after burning her to death.
So now they can praise King and adore his message.
Much as many do with Jesus Christ.
Then you neither know Dr. King nor Reverend Wright.
Amen Richardsgirl!
Most Americans know "I have a Dream" and nothign else. King's speech against the Vietnam War "Time To Break The Silence" makes Jeremiah Wright look like a pacifist. King calls the U.S. "the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today. "
MLK was HONEST whereas Wright is a LIAR. That alone makes the comparison an insult to MLK.
I see echoes of Dr. King in Dr. Wright's sermons. I am old enough to have heard many of them. Rev. Wright is being persecuted the same as Dr. King was. Just for speaking truth to power to those who really don't want to hear it.
Thank your Maria1253...Someone finally sees the truth. Maybe 40 years from now considering the road America is heading down, many will see Rev./Dr. Wright in the same light they now see Rev. King. Why can't Americans accept the truth to what both of these honest men said and are saying?
Are you so afraid of it and can't face it, that your country is a purveyor of misery, torture and death
around the world in the name of Imperialism? That racism, prejudice, bigotry is alive and well in America in 21st. century? That America's poor, black and white are irrelevant to the powers that be?.
Posted April 4, 2008 | 10:31 AM (EST)