In Stephen Oates' excellent biography of the late Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., the files of the F.B.I. are cited as background references for recording of King's life. Sadly, although a non-violent man of the cloth, due to King's firm theological convictions, mixed with his Leadership ability, Martin Luther King, Jr. was a man under constant government surveillance.
Horrifically, according to Oates' biography, when M.L. King, Jr. was assassinated, a field agent at the F.B.I. office in Atlanta apparently gleefully stated, "I'm glad that they finally got that S.O.B. . . ."
This is America folks.
No, this was not America under the recent "War on Terror" legislation. This was America in 1968.
Secret wire-taps and government surveillance of good Christian Leaders (such as King) has been a recurring item for news reporters . . .
The question, of course, arises, "Do we need all of this Government surveillance?" Are we actually helping keep America safer (against Al Qaida and her network of terror)?
OR are we living in an American society in which our bloated federal bureaucracy has too much time on its hands, an over-lapping set of internal political agendas, etc., and thus our "spies" are actually increasingly spying on We the People of the United States of America?
Well, since our Vice President's office will not open itself to Congressional Review (part and parcel of what it means to have a tri-partite Government founded on the principle of "checks and balances on power!"), we are largely left in the dark, at least until figures like King are assassinated and the fed in question makes a historically bad decision . . .
From "that S.O.B." (to quote the F.B.I. agent according to Oates' biography of Martin Luther King, Jr.) to the Man who is known as the Father of the Civil Rights Movement and has streets named after him throughout America and even a National Holiday commemorating his life and work . . .
My own answer is that we should start slashing funding for any and all governmental surveillance that cannot be directly linked to sister groups of Al Qaida or Al Qaida herself, and then with strict Congressional oversight concerning "who" such suspected terrorists in fact are.
Blessings in Jesus,
Rob J King, Candidate for Civil Liberties
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
You mean using the FISA court? Good idea.
Whatever funding is going to these surveillance programs needs to go to building our foundations so that we don't have to worry about violence from radicals. Eliminate radical elements of society by making sure that their children have good schools, that every adult has the opportunity for a good job that pays a living wage, etc.
This administration believes that the surveillance is necessary "because people hate America", but they don't do anything to actually stop people from hating us except for pointing a gun at the foreheads of people around the world and say "you will like us, or else."
Insanity.
I agree with Chad, perhaps you don't realise how poor a public image you have in the rest of the world.
The US does good work around the world, yet the apparent double standards, puzzle, frustrate and anger people. On one hand helping feed the helpless on the other hand pointing the gun and destabilising regions.
Watch out for spies, necesary, but not when they spy on your own people. Under the apartheid government we were spied on internaly and it didn't serve South Africa well.
Chad,
Thank you for your response. I am in fundamental agreement, although my emphasis would still be on national defense against radical Islam which is as brutal to Baha'i Hindus, Zoroastrians, Christians, Jews, etc. as any religion out there (this comes from my current and past teaching in the subject field of "World Religions").
As a whole, radical Islam is brutal to religious minorities living under them.
Nick, thank you for sharing your perspective also. Yes, this internal spying is what I am MOST concerned about here in the U.S., much of which is politically motivated.
Blessings in Jesus,
Rob
Post a Comment