SC271-10

https://scheerpost.com/2023/01/15/the-liberal-contempt-for-martin-luther-kings-final-year/

The Liberal Contempt for Martin Luther King’s Final Year

The anniversary of his assassination always brings a flood of tributes to Martin Luther King Jr., and this Sunday will surely be no exception. But those tributes — including from countless organizations calling themselves progressive — are routinely evasive about the anti-militarist ideals that King passionately expressed during the final year of his life.

You could call it evasion by omission.

The standard liberal canon waxes fondly nostalgic about King’s “I have a dream” speech in 1963 and his efforts against racial segregation. But in memory lane, the Dr. King who lived his last year is persona non grata.

The pattern is positively Orwellian. King explicitly condemned what he called “the madness of militarism.” And by any reasonable standard, that madness can be diagnosed as pervading U.S. foreign policy in 2021. But today, almost all politicians and mainstream media commentators act as though King never said such things, or if he did then those observations have little to do with today.

But they have everything to do with the USA now in its twentieth year of continuous warfare. The Pentagon’s constant bombing in the Middle East and elsewhere is the scarcely noticed wallpaper in the U.S. media’s echo chamber.

What compounds the madness of militarism in the present day is the silence that stretches eerily and lethally across almost the entire U.S. political spectrum, including the bulk of progressive organizations doing excellent work to challenge economic injustice and institutionalized racism here at home.

But as for the institutionalized militarism that terrorizes, wounds and kills people overseas — overwhelmingly people of color — a sad truth is that most progressive U.S. organizations have little to say about it. At the same time, they eagerly and selectively laud King as a visionary and role model.

King didn’t simply oppose the Vietnam War. In an April 4, 1967 speech at New York’s Riverside Church delivered exactly a year before he was assassinated — titled “Beyond Vietnam” — he referred to the U.S. government as “the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today” and broadly denounced the racist and imperial underpinnings of U.S. foreign policy. From Vietnam to South Africa to Latin America, King said, our country was on the “wrong side of a world revolution” — suppressing revolutions “of the shirtless and barefoot people” in the Global South, instead of supporting them. 

King critiqued the economics of U.S. foreign policy, complaining about “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.” And he castigated U.S. federal budgets prioritizing militarism: “A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.” 

Mainstream media today pretend that King’s anti-militarism pronouncements were never uttered, but that was not the case in 1967. Condemnation was swift, emphatic and widespread. Life magazine denounced the “Beyond Vietnam” speech as “demagogic slander that sounded like a script for Radio Hanoi.” The New York Times and Washington Post both published harsh and patronizing editorials.

Today, it’s not just a problem of elite media — but also a vast spectrum of organizations that are taking a dive in the fight against the warfare state. This problem undermines the political resonance and social mission of countless organizations that do wonderful work but are betraying a crucial part of the living legacy of Dr. King, whom they never tire of claiming to be emulating and venerating.

This crisis is now heightened under the Biden administration. In an ominous echo of the mid-1960s, when King began speaking out against the warfare state, the kind of split between somewhat progressive domestic policies and militaristic foreign policies that occurred under the Lyndon Johnson presidency now appears to be occurring under the presidency of Joe Biden.

In the persistent “guns vs. butter” reckoning, it’s clear that federal funds needed to uplift poor and working-class people as well as our planet keep getting diverted to militarism and war.

Dr. King pointed out that, in effect, what goes around comes around. As he put it, “the bombs in Vietnam explode at home.” But there is a dire shortage of large progressive organizations willing to say that the bombs in Afghanistan and Iraq and elsewhere have been exploding at home for two decades.

Twenty-first century bombs that have been exploding overseas, courtesy of U.S. taxpayers, also explode at home in terms of the further militarization of the economy, police, culture and consciousness — as well as the misdirection of vital resources to the Pentagon rather than human needs.

“It challenges the imagination to contemplate what lives we could transform if we were to cease killing,” Dr. King said as the Vietnam War raged. The massive U.S. military budget still functions the way King described it — “some demonic, destructive suction tube.” Yet the silences across so much of the U.S. political spectrum, including the liberal establishment and a great many progressive groups, persist in contempt of what Martin Luther King stood for during the final year of his life.

....

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2023/01/15/the-world-economic-forum-the-world-health-organization-are-elevating-themselves-above-the-worlds-governments/

The World Economic Forum & the World Health Organization Are Elevating Themselves Above  the World’s Governments

“In the last three years, the common people’s exclusion from what is still sold as a democratic process has reached a pinnacle.” — Peter Koenig

As former senior economist for the World Bank and the World Health Organization, Peter Koenig has inside information.  He shares it with us here:  https://www.globalresearch.ca/wef-who-they-running-death-cult/5804177 

First, ask yourself how Klaus Schwab’s organization, WEF, and Rockefeller, Bill Gates, and Big Pharma’s organization, WHO, got the word “world” in their name.  The only organization on a world level is the United Nations.  As it name implies, it is an organization of independent nations. The nations speak, not the world, much less a private organization like the WEF and a privately funded organization like WHO.  

Globalists who speak in the name of the world have already pulled a fast one on us by appropriating a name that suggests that two private organizations speak for the world.  Both of these organizations are in the process of acquiring this private authority over humanity. The WEF has been at it for 53 years, and the WHO since 1948 when it was founded by Rockefeller. In this current year, WHO has a big push underway to acquire authority over the health policies of every country. If WHO succeeds, this privately funded organization will be independent of governments and have no political accountability to people.  The same organization who lied and deceived with its assurance that the Covid jab was “safe and effective” is grasping for the power to impose worldwide whatever diktat it wishes.  Are you happy with this?  

Both the WEF and WHO operate by inventing  threats and controlling their explanations, such as pandemics, the solution to which is the centralization of power and erosion of national sovereignty and accountability to the people.  

For 53 years WEF has worked diligently to create the image of itself as the top club to which to belong.  They groom up-and-coming political, professional, and business leaders.  An invitation to attend a meeting makes the recipient feel special.  Those without invitations yearn for them. This works to create certainty about the rightness of the WEF agenda.  Attendees hear addresses that they have no capability of challenging and accept the ideas as they come from big names. After 53 years of this, the WEF has a large and influential following.

WHO has gone further into becoming an official world government organization by being brought into the United Nations system. If WHO succeeds in getting control over every country’s health policy, it will be the end of independent science in medicine.  Except for nuclear war, it is difficult to imagine a more disastrous development.

Imagine that you are a US Senator or a House committee chairman and you comprehend that these organizations’ agenda is to terminate national sovereignty.  What can you do about it?  If you begin speaking against them, exposing them, they use their vast network to cut off your political campaign contributions and to demonize you as a reactionary standing in the way of solutions to the world’s pressing problems. 

The independence of people and countries has been moved far along the path to their demise.

Second, ask yourself how it can be that these two organizations that hyped the Covid narrative to the hilt can have any credibility now afterwards when every government’s official data show a massive increase in unexplained excess deaths following the Covid vaccination?  It is the vaccinated, not the unvaccinated, who are suddenly dying and developing illnesses.  Doctors also report a surge in cancer and a drop in fertility following the vaccination campaign. 

Thousands of medical scientists and doctors have concluded from the evidence that the mRNA vaccines are deadly to many and cause a wide range of serious and permanent health injuries to many more.  Some of the most prestigious medical scientists and doctors in the world have called for the immediate halt to mRNA injections.  Yet, the US Food and Drug Administration has approved the injections for infants, and many parents remain so ignorant that they participate in the murder and health injury of their own children.

It is an honest question to ask how such insouciant, gullible, and trusting people can withstand the WEF/WHO onslaught.