Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [ipjn] NPR--Obama Administration Weighs Indefinite Detention

Expand Messages
  • Reynaldo Hernandez
    That s an intriguing question, Marvin.  My search turns up no King reference to WW II or atomic warfare.  Not having the ability to channel Dr. King, I find
    Message 1 of 11 , Dec 1, 2010
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      That's an intriguing question, Marvin.  My search turns up no King reference to WW II or atomic warfare.  Not having the ability to channel Dr. King, I find it difficult to go beyond saying that dropping the big one (or two, or more) probably would not have received his ringing endorsement.  Would he have admitted moral ambiguity in any area, such as dropping the A-bomb or WW II?  Only a bona fide King scholar might be able to answer that.  The King Center in Atlanta, GA, maintains extensive King and related archives, but I don't know how much help they might be in answering your question,

      Reynaldo

      --- On Tue, 11/30/10, RITA WAGNER <rita_marvin@...> wrote:

      From: RITA WAGNER <rita_marvin@...>
      Subject: Re: [ipjn] NPR--Obama Administration Weighs Indefinite Detention
      To: ipjn@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Tuesday, November 30, 2010, 4:51 PM

       

      From Marvin---I appreciate this exchange.  We are strangely silent about the possibilities of our military actions moulding terrorists to lash out at the U.S. with lethal results.  I am a MLK admirer.  Does anyone know what his feelings were on firebombing cities, Nagasaki, and Hiroshima of WWll?

      --- On Tue, 11/30/10, Reynaldo Hernandez <rgrherez@...> wrote:

      From: Reynaldo Hernandez <rgrherez@...>
      Subject: Re: [ipjn] NPR--Obama Administration Weighs Indefinite Detention
      To: ipjn@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Tuesday, November 30, 2010, 9:55 AM

       

      I did not mean to endorse violence.  I am just saying there are ambiguities that make it difficult to set forth clear answers.  While I also agree that nonviolence is better in the long term, I think it is naive to believe that a radical, rapid shift from violence to nonviolence is either possible or effective.   Also, it is clear that the shift can be prompted only from the bottom, as it is clear that the currently available political leadership is not going to do it.  It can happen only in carefully planned stages, and it must begin with the consistent practice of nonviolence in our daily living.

      Reynaldo

      --- On Tue, 11/30/10, Dave Lambert <dl2001@...> wrote:

      From: Dave Lambert <dl2001@...>
      Subject: Re: [ipjn] NPR--Obama Administration Weighs Indefinite Detention
      To: ipjn@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Tuesday, November 30, 2010, 5:38 AM

       

      

      Nick,
       
      I couldn't have said it better myself. So I won't.
      Although I will add MLK Jr's words, which cost him his friends, media attention, and perhaps his life:
      "As I have walked among the desperate, rejected and angry young men I have told them that Molotov cocktails and rifles would not solve their problems. I have tried to offer them my deepest compassion while maintaining my conviction that social change comes most meaningfully through nonviolent action. But they asked — and rightly so — what about Vietnam? They asked if our own nation wasn't using massive doses of violence to solve its problems, to bring about the changes it wanted. Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today — my own government" 1967
      -Martin Luther King Jr.
      (I wonder how much attention will be given to the last year of Martin's life as we
      celebrate MLK in January?)

      Dave
      Fort Wayne
       
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 6:13 PM
      Subject: RE: [ipjn] NPR--Obama Administration Weighs Indefinite Detention

       

      Most of those detained at Guantanamo were turned in for a bounty and there was never any grounds to hold them.  After years of incarceration and torture for some at least, it is certainly not improbable to think that they might want to do harm to the U.S.  That said I would take with a grain of salt any statements by our government on so called released terrorists returning to terrorism. 

      We can have national security, but we can't have it as long as we continue illegal, immoral wars and the policy of American Empire (domination of the world for the benefit of transnational corporations).  If we change our foreign policy, apologize and provide funds for damaged countries to rebuild themselves we will go a long way to taking away the reasons others have to strike back at the U.S.
      With these kinds of policies all who donated to Obama should ask for their money back.
      Nick Egnatz
      --- On Mon, 11/29/10, Reynaldo Hernandez <rgrherez@...> wrote:

      From: Reynaldo Hernandez <rgrherez@...>
      Subject: RE: [ipjn] NPR--Obama Administration Weighs Indefinite Detention
      To: ipjn@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Monday, November 29, 2010, 3:31 PM

       

      I don't disagree with your point on Constitutionality, but I must ask:  How, then, do we keep captured terrorists out of circulation, knowing now from experience that most of them that have been released for any reason have returned to their old ways, more highly motivated than ever?

      Reynaldo

      --- On Sun, 11/28/10, Wayne McCallister <docmac02@...> wrote:

      From: Wayne McCallister <docmac02@...>
      Subject: RE: [ipjn] NPR--Obama Administration Weighs Indefinite Detention
      To: ipjn@yahoogroups.com, "Bob Baldwin" <bbaldwin@...>, "Christine Glaser" <christineglaser@...>, "Dave Lambert" <dl2001@...>, "Doctor Reibel" <p.reibel@...>, "Mary Ann Fadae" <mdfadae@...>, "Nick Egnatz" <nickatlakehills@...>, "Stephen Brockmann" <s.brockmann@...>, "Steve Kent" <stevek6971@...>, "Timothy Baer" <timothybaer2003@...>
      Date: Sunday, November 28, 2010, 6:12 PM

       

      There is nothing to weigh.  It is wrong.  It is against the Constitution, and a person who is supposed to be a lawyer should know that!
       


      To: ipjn@yahoogroups.com
      From: bbaldwin@...
      Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 14:16:45 -0500
      Subject: [ipjn] NPR--Obama Administration Weighs Indefinite Detention

       

      [When Obama does it, it's not fascism.--B.B.]
       

      Obama Administration Weighs Indefinite Detention





    • RITA WAGNER
      From Marvin---Thanks Reynaldo, MLK was a boy during WWll, and who knows what a just war is.  There s that strange silence again. ... From: Reynaldo Hernandez
      Message 2 of 11 , Dec 1, 2010
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        From Marvin---Thanks Reynaldo, MLK was a boy during WWll, and who knows what a just war is.  There's that strange silence again.

        --- On Wed, 12/1/10, Reynaldo Hernandez <rgrherez753@...> wrote:

        From: Reynaldo Hernandez <rgrherez753@...>
        Subject: Re: [ipjn] NPR--Obama Administration Weighs Indefinite Detention
        To: ipjn@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Wednesday, December 1, 2010, 11:41 AM

         

        That's an intriguing question, Marvin.  My search turns up no King reference to WW II or atomic warfare.  Not having the ability to channel Dr. King, I find it difficult to go beyond saying that dropping the big one (or two, or more) probably would not have received his ringing endorsement.  Would he have admitted moral ambiguity in any area, such as dropping the A-bomb or WW II?  Only a bona fide King scholar might be able to answer that.  The King Center in Atlanta, GA, maintains extensive King and related archives, but I don't know how much help they might be in answering your question,

        Reynaldo

        --- On Tue, 11/30/10, RITA WAGNER <rita_marvin@...> wrote:

        From: RITA WAGNER <rita_marvin@...>
        Subject: Re: [ipjn] NPR--Obama Administration Weighs Indefinite Detention
        To: ipjn@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Tuesday, November 30, 2010, 4:51 PM

         

        From Marvin---I appreciate this exchange.  We are strangely silent about the possibilities of our military actions moulding terrorists to lash out at the U.S. with lethal results.  I am a MLK admirer.  Does anyone know what his feelings were on firebombing cities, Nagasaki, and Hiroshima of WWll?

        --- On Tue, 11/30/10, Reynaldo Hernandez <rgrherez@...> wrote:

        From: Reynaldo Hernandez <rgrherez@...>
        Subject: Re: [ipjn] NPR--Obama Administration Weighs Indefinite Detention
        To: ipjn@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Tuesday, November 30, 2010, 9:55 AM

         

        I did not mean to endorse violence.  I am just saying there are ambiguities that make it difficult to set forth clear answers.  While I also agree that nonviolence is better in the long term, I think it is naive to believe that a radical, rapid shift from violence to nonviolence is either possible or effective.   Also, it is clear that the shift can be prompted only from the bottom, as it is clear that the currently available political leadership is not going to do it.  It can happen only in carefully planned stages, and it must begin with the consistent practice of nonviolence in our daily living.

        Reynaldo

        --- On Tue, 11/30/10, Dave Lambert <dl2001@...> wrote:

        From: Dave Lambert <dl2001@...>
        Subject: Re: [ipjn] NPR--Obama Administration Weighs Indefinite Detention
        To: ipjn@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Tuesday, November 30, 2010, 5:38 AM

         

        

        Nick,
         
        I couldn't have said it better myself. So I won't.
        Although I will add MLK Jr's words, which cost him his friends, media attention, and perhaps his life:
        "As I have walked among the desperate, rejected and angry young men I have told them that Molotov cocktails and rifles would not solve their problems. I have tried to offer them my deepest compassion while maintaining my conviction that social change comes most meaningfully through nonviolent action. But they asked — and rightly so — what about Vietnam? They asked if our own nation wasn't using massive doses of violence to solve its problems, to bring about the changes it wanted. Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today — my own government" 1967
        -Martin Luther King Jr.
        (I wonder how much attention will be given to the last year of Martin's life as we
        celebrate MLK in January?)

        Dave
        Fort Wayne
         
        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 6:13 PM
        Subject: RE: [ipjn] NPR--Obama Administration Weighs Indefinite Detention

         

        Most of those detained at Guantanamo were turned in for a bounty and there was never any grounds to hold them.  After years of incarceration and torture for some at least, it is certainly not improbable to think that they might want to do harm to the U.S.  That said I would take with a grain of salt any statements by our government on so called released terrorists returning to terrorism. 

        We can have national security, but we can't have it as long as we continue illegal, immoral wars and the policy of American Empire (domination of the world for the benefit of transnational corporations).  If we change our foreign policy, apologize and provide funds for damaged countries to rebuild themselves we will go a long way to taking away the reasons others have to strike back at the U.S.
        With these kinds of policies all who donated to Obama should ask for their money back.
        Nick Egnatz
        --- On Mon, 11/29/10, Reynaldo Hernandez <rgrherez@...> wrote:

        From: Reynaldo Hernandez <rgrherez@...>
        Subject: RE: [ipjn] NPR--Obama Administration Weighs Indefinite Detention
        To: ipjn@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Monday, November 29, 2010, 3:31 PM

         

        I don't disagree with your point on Constitutionality, but I must ask:  How, then, do we keep captured terrorists out of circulation, knowing now from experience that most of them that have been released for any reason have returned to their old ways, more highly motivated than ever?

        Reynaldo

        --- On Sun, 11/28/10, Wayne McCallister <docmac02@...> wrote:

        From: Wayne McCallister <docmac02@...>
        Subject: RE: [ipjn] NPR--Obama Administration Weighs Indefinite Detention
        To: ipjn@yahoogroups.com, "Bob Baldwin" <bbaldwin@...>, "Christine Glaser" <christineglaser@...>, "Dave Lambert" <dl2001@...>, "Doctor Reibel" <p.reibel@...>, "Mary Ann Fadae" <mdfadae@...>, "Nick Egnatz" <nickatlakehills@...>, "Stephen Brockmann" <s.brockmann@...>, "Steve Kent" <stevek6971@...>, "Timothy Baer" <timothybaer2003@...>
        Date: Sunday, November 28, 2010, 6:12 PM

         

        There is nothing to weigh.  It is wrong.  It is against the Constitution, and a person who is supposed to be a lawyer should know that!
         


        To: ipjn@yahoogroups.com
        From: bbaldwin@...
        Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 14:16:45 -0500
        Subject: [ipjn] NPR--Obama Administration Weighs Indefinite Detention

         

        [When Obama does it, it's not fascism.--B.B.]
         

        Obama Administration Weighs Indefinite Detention





      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.