|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,747
Dawg Talker
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,747 |
Somehow I doubt you went thru all the trouble and money, probably just had a map of Africa and closed your eyes and picked a spot...
New roots
Wealthy African-Americans are using DNA kits to trace their roots - all the way back to Africa. But, says Gary Younge the results may tell them things they don't want to hear
* Gary Younge
*
o Gary Younge
o The Guardian,
o Friday February 17 2006
Contact us
Close
*
Contact the Science editor
science@guardian.co.uk
* Report errors or inaccuracies: reader@guardian.co.uk
* Letters for publication should be sent to: letters@guardian.co.uk
* If you need help using the site: userhelp@guardian.co.uk
* Call the main Guardian and Observer switchboard:
+44 (0)20 7278 2332
*
o Advertising guide
o License/buy our content
About this article
Close
This article appeared in the Guardian on Friday February 17 2006 on p14 of the G2 comment & features section. It was last updated at 00:22 on February 17 2006.
Oprah is a Zulu. Never mind that she was born and raised in Mississippi and her great grandparents hailed from no further away than Georgia and North Carolina, Ms Winfrey, the queen of the televised confessional, is not just suggesting her lineage might stretch back thousands of years to a specific African tribe. She is asserting it as a definitive fact. "I always wondered what it would be like if it turned out I am a South African. I feel so at home here ... Do you know that I actually am one?" she told an audience of 3,200 in Johannesburg last year. "I went in search of my roots and had my DNA tested, and I am a Zulu."
This month in the US, Oprah has been joined by eight other African-American luminaries, including Quincy Jones and Whoopi Goldberg, in tracing their genealogy. Thirty years after Alex Haley famously traced the oral history passed down through his family back to Gambia to find his African ancestor, Kunta Kinte, who had been sold into slavery these celebrities will undertake a similar journey alongside Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr in a television series called African-American Lives. But unlike Haley's Roots, few have been able to turn to family historians in search of their genealogical narrative.
So when the stories stop and the paper trail of slaves bought and sold runs out, the participants have turned to genetic science to trace their kin. But while these journeys into the past are essentially personal, they raise broader issues about racial authenticity and the genetic basis for racial categorisations. Furthermore, it addresses the fundamental issue of whether any of us can, ultimately, really say where we come from - and what use it would do us even if we could.
Over the past few years laboratories have begun to amass a database of DNA samples from around the world, including parts of West Africa, the area from which most slaves were caught, sold and shipped to the Americas.
The technology aims either to trace a person's lineage through their genes or compile a statistical breakdown, by geographical region, of their genetic makeup. Alondra Nelson, an assistant professor of sociology and African-American studies at Yale, says results "could stretch from several thousand years to tens of thousands of years in a person's ancestry".
Mark Shriver, an assistant professor of anthropology and genetics at Penn State university, conducts geographical genetic tests on his students among others. He describes himself as white but his own tests reveal that his DNA is 86% white but also 11% west African and 3% indigenous American. "For most people it is consistent with what they thought," he says. "How the west African DNA got into my family line was never explained to me."
Another method of testing follows the genes back through gender lines. One, the patrilineal, follows the Y chromosome through your father, your father's father, your father's father's father and so on. The other, the mitochondrial, follows DNA through your maternal line - or your mother's mother, your mother's mother's mother and so on.
"It's basically a matchmaking game," Megan Smolenyak, an expert in family history research, told the New York Daily News. "I like to warn folks: be sure you can deal with the results ... Some people don't like what they find."
The science, now commercially available, has become something of a boom industry. Growing numbers of relatively wealthy African-Americans have been buying up test kits that can cost up to $350 (£200) a throw.
While other Americans could travel to towns in Ireland, Italy or Germany in search of genealogical sustenance, slavery deprived African-Americans of a clear and precise geographical bond with their own ancestry. As Gates puts it: "There is no Ellis Island for the descendants of the slave trade." Moreover, since slave-owners changed people's names, regularly split up families and banned reading and writing, the usual methods of keeping family histories have not been available to African-Americans until relatively recently.
This new science, then, seemed to offer a means of telling a story that had been denied and hidden. Even as DNA evidence was freeing many - mostly black - prisoners from death row it was also unlocking historical secrets. For example, historians had insisted for 150 years that America's third president, Thomas Jefferson, could not have fathered children by his slave mistress Sally Hemmings. Many African-Americans claimed otherwise, however, and in 1998 scientists followed the Y chromosome DNA in Jefferson's family line to establish a definitive link with the Hemmings family. Almost 200 years after Jefferson had cryptically parried accusations of the affair with the words "the man who fears no truth has nothing to fear from lies", science had exposed the facts that a mixture of prejudice and politics had kept hidden.
In reality, however, the truths this science reveals are no less selective than those you will hear from a politician. Two years ago I swabbed my cheek with something that felt like a cotton bud and sent it off to a Washington-based organisation called African Ancestry. Several weeks later it sent me a letter telling me that the "Y chromosome DNA sequence that we determined from your sample matches with the Hausa people in Nigeria ... This result means that you have inherited through your father a segment of DNA that was passed on consistently from father to son to you. This segment of DNA is presently found in Africa in Nigeria."
They also sent me a map showing me where Nigeria is and a "certificate of ancestry" declaring that I "share paternal genetic ancestry with the Hausa people in Nigeria". It went on,"You can display it with pride among other important family documents."
Elsewhere in the letter, however, came information that would seem to minimise the entire enterprise if not negate it altogether. "The Y chromosome may represent less than 1% of your entire genetic makeup" it said. That is to say that I had possibly been awarded an ancestry courtesy of a fraction of my DNA.
Herein lies one of the central problems with tracing ones roots through DNA. Science can only tell you so much. Stop the genealogical wheel at an inconvenient moment and some of the world's greatest black icons could be rendered not African, but European. Muhammad Ali's great grandfather was Irish; Bob Marley's father was British. According to Shriver, Gates - the most prominent black academic in the country - has DNA that is 50% European and 50% West African. Both his matrilineal and paternal lines came back to Europe.
"I've spoken with African Americans who have tried four or five different genetic genealogy companies because they weren't satisfied with the results," says Nelson. "They received different results each time and kept going until they got a result they were happy with."
"There are some people who are black who may have only 10% African ancestry," says Shriver. "It helps create an understanding that race is an illusion and that there isn't any real difference between races. They show that we're all mixes."
Critics of Shriver's work say he is actually achieving the opposite - elevating race from a social construct - a difference created to justify racism - into something that appears both real and even calculable. Paul Gilroy, the Anthony Giddens sociology professor at the London School of Economics, says: "To make all these claims is to realign science with the racial categorisations of the 18th century."
Shriver defends his work. "That is a potential problem," he admits. "The labels are arbitrary. It's a model. We have taken these four categories that mean something for New World people. But I don't respect people who don't want to explore this issue and see what happens. There's quite a lot of hubris out there when it comes to genomic work and ethics."
Neither the mixing nor the denial is exclusive to descendants of former slaves or issues of race. Everyone could claim African ancestry given that civilisation is deemed to have started there. Although Mediterranean Europeans define themselves as white, they share a long heritage with North Africans.
"Everybody is mixed, but not everybody counts as mixed," says Gilroy. "These things are interesting but the truth is that no one can say with any certainty where they come from."
Like Nelson, Gilroy does not deny the need for these tests. "Some people say knowing made them feel complete," she says. She tells of one African-American woman whose match took her to an area of Sierra Leone where many of the women were accomplished potters. This woman came from a family of skilled potters. "I don't know how you like those two facts," says Nelson. "But I know it was very meaningful for her."
Which brings us back to Oprah. Last week she gave author James Frey a dressing down on her couch for the memoir he wrote and she helped promote that turned out to owe far more to fiction than fact. Angry, and at times tearful, Oprah asked the author of A Million Little Pieces to explain why he felt "the need to lie". "It is difficult for me to talk to you because I really feel duped," she said. "But more importantly I feel that you betrayed millions of readers." Whatever Oprah's belief about her ancestry, her assertion that she is Zulu is no less misleading.
According to most historical accounts, the Zulu nation was consolidated only after the departure of slaves from West Africa to the Americas. Moreover, there is little in the way of genetic lineage that comes close to matching a particular linguistic group such as the Zulu nation. When Oprah had her DNA tested for the programme, the results suggested her most likely match was from the Kpelles tribe of Liberia. Indeed she was told that she could not have come from South Africa. None of this is likely to stop her claiming the Zulus as her kith and kin. "I'm crazy about the South African accent," she said. "I wish I had been born here."
Perhaps her new-found relations, and those of her fellow celebrities say less about the power of science than something both far more elusive and compelling - the desire for identity. web page
[b]USNavyDawg (Ret.) ![[Linked Image from i87.photobucket.com]](http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k155/brownsfan4173/NFL-Football.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 3
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 3 |
Quote:
Quote:
Oh, so because people rioted when MLK was assasinated you're going to say it's revisionist to think of MLK as a peaceful man?
Firstly, it wasn't just AFTER he was asassinated. Many such riots came long before his death. You already know that. He would go from city to city spreading his message of peace and equality, and once the march was over, the riot began.
That was not what I was refering to at all. What I am refering to is a fact for those who were children such as myself at the time. Something nobody seems to wish to include often times. Something I do NOT see in my grandchildrens text books. Which most certainly is "just as factual" and a part of "the civil rights movement" as anything else.
While MLK's message and "his feelings" were honorable, riots, hatred, vadalsim and looting were what were often left in his wake. Those are simply the facts of the matter.
I never really had any problems going to school in a desegrigated area untill then. After that? Everything changed in that regard.
I wasn't speaking about his message. I was speaking of the "direct and immediate results" that impacted myself and a generation "at that time".
Why are you being defensive? I'm just helping tell the "rest of the story". It wasn't ALL the "feel good fairy tale" some make it out to be.
That's what I'm saying................
_________________________________________________
The Long Hot Summers, 1965-1967
Urban Unrest & Violence
In August of 1965, violence broke out in the Watts section of Los Angeles, California. A minor police incident escalated into five days of arson, looting, and violence. This required a force of 16,000 policy, highway patrol, and National Guardsmen to quell the violence. At the end, there were 34 dead, 1,000 injured, and 4,000 in jail. Over 250 buildings were burned (Isserman and Kazin, America Divided, p. 141)
The outbreak of such violence was repeated during the summers of 1966 and 1967. In 1966, the cities included were Brooklyn (NY), Chicago (Ill), Cleveland and Dayton (Ohio), San Francisco (Cal). The unrest spread during the summer of 1967 and included Tampa (Fla), Boston (Mass), Cincinatti (Ohio), Buffalo (NY), Newark (NJ), Toledo (Ohio), South Bend (Ind), New Haven (Conn), Chicago (Ill), Rochester (NY), and East Harlem (NY). The worst of the episodes occurred in Detroit, Michigan. The governor of the state certified to President Johnson that Michigan could not guarantee "public safety" and, as a result, President Johnson ordered 4700 U.S. paratroopers to the city to help restore order.
http://faculty.smu.edu/dsimon/Change-CivRts2.html
What I'm saying is simply this, often times, people that claimed to support his message, didn't follow it very well. I remember our house being shot at, and my dad shooting back. I remember black kids who I thought were my friends, suddenly have racial bigotry towards me.
They are memories that I won't forget. And that's what I THINK OF when I hear the name MLK. Because I lived through it. Many didn't. And they were BOTH colors..........
No, no no....Thats not how it happened. 1st you say"He would go from city to city spreading his message of peace and equality, and once the march was over, the riot began." That is so far from the truth. To begin with, America was in TURMOIL during the 60s. The war was going on and EVERYONE was protesting, students over the war ( see Kent State), Black people over equality. On the equality issue, there were many factions and groups of people protesting, from extremist, ie Black Panthers and Black Muslims, to the peaceful Dr King. The Black extremist stand was.....we will get equality or we will burn your cities down, which really meant they would burn down the Black neighborhoods( I never really understood that????) I too remember in 1967 and 1968, the cerfew and the tanks rolling up and down the streets at night. I guess the point I'm trying to make is, the roits were already going on, and Dr. King was going from city to city trying to prevent them, not the other way around.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
yeah...that's exactly how I did it
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,747
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,747 |
Quote:
yeah...that's exactly how I did it
Wow, what a waste of time and money.
[b]USNavyDawg (Ret.)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
Quote:
Quote:
yeah...that's exactly how I did it
Wow, what a waste of time and money.
what...your contributions to this message board....agreed!
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,747
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,747 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
yeah...that's exactly how I did it
Wow, what a waste of time and money.
what...your contributions to this message board....agreed!
 I see once again, you are having a hard time keeping up with the conversation. No surprise.
[b]USNavyDawg (Ret.)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
we're having a conversation 
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,431
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,431 |
Quote:
Don't listen to the "black man". Don't listen to the "preacher". Listen to the words.
The man said a lot more than, "I have a dream."
He certainly did say alot more than that but alot of those words were first issued by others before MLK ( actually his first name was Micheal not Martin ) as he was a big time plagerist . Well documented as was his womanizing ways not to mention other even less savory rumors .
His messages and speeches are and were meaningful and the man was just that ..a man . A man who had his faults like the rest of us but has been put up above reproach .
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
Quote:
Quote:
Don't listen to the "black man". Don't listen to the "preacher". Listen to the words.
The man said a lot more than, "I have a dream."
He certainly did say alot more than that but alot of those words were first issued by others before MLK ( actually his first name was Micheal not Martin ) as he was a big time plagerist . Well documented as was his womanizing ways not to mention other even less savory rumors .
His messages and speeches are and were meaningful and the man was just that ..a man . A man who had his faults like the rest of us but has been put up above reproach .
I can't say he's above reproach, but he's definitely on a pedastal...but most people really don't know a whole lot about him.
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618 |
Popular view of King ignores complexity
By DEEPTI HAJELA, Associated Press Writer Sun Jan 20, 6:56 PM ET
NEW YORK - They are some of the most famous words in American history: "I have a dream ..." And the man who said them has become an icon.
Martin Luther King Jr. has certainly gotten his share of attention this year, the subject of a presidential campaign controversy over his legacy that blew up just around the time of the holiday created to honor him.
But nearly 40 years after his assassination in April 1968, after the deaths of his wife and of others who knew both the man and what he stood for, some say King is facing the same fate that has befallen many a historical figure — being frozen in a moment in time that ignores the full complexity of the man and his message.
"Everyone knows, even the smallest kid knows about Martin Luther King, can say his most famous moment was that "I have a dream" speech," said Henry Louis Taylor Jr., professor of urban and regional planning at the University of Buffalo.
"No one can go further than one sentence," he said. "All we know is that this guy had a dream, we don't know what that dream was."
At the time of his death, King was working on anti-poverty and anti-war issues. He had spoken out against the Vietnam War in 1967, and was in Memphis in April 1968 in support of striking sanitation workers.
King had come a long way from the crowds who cheered him at the 1963 March on Washington, when he was introduced as "the moral leader of our nation" — and when he pronounced "I have a dream" on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial.
By taking on issues outside segregation, he had lost the support of many newspapers and magazines, and his relationship with the White House had suffered, said Harvard Sitkoff, a professor of history at the University of New Hampshire who has written a recently published book on King.
"He was considered by many to be a pariah," Sitkoff said.
But he took on issues of poverty and militarism because he considered them vital "to make equality something real and not just racial brotherhood but equality in fact," Sitkoff said.
While there has been scholarly study of King and everything he did, that knowledge hasn't translated into the popular culture perception of him and the civil rights movement, said Richard Greenwald, professor of history at Drew University.
"We're living increasingly in a culture of top 10 lists, of celebrity biopics which simplify the past as entertainment or mythology," he said. "We lose a view on what real leadership is by compressing him down to one window."
That does a disservice to both King and society, said Melissa Harris-Lacewell, professor of politics and African-American studies at Princeton University.
By freezing him at that point, by putting him on a pedestal of perfection that doesn't acknowledge his complex views, "it makes it impossible both for us to find to new leaders and for us to aspire to leadership," Harris-Lacewell said.
She believes it's important for Americans in 2008 to remember how disliked King was in 1968.
"If we forget that, then it seems like the only people we can get behind must be popular," Harris-Lacewell said. "Following King meant following the unpopular road, not the popular one."
In becoming an icon, King's legacy has been used by people all over the political spectrum, said Glenn McNair, associate professor of history at Kenyon College.
He's been part of the 2008 presidential race, in which Barack Obama could be the country's first black president. Obama has invoked King, and Sen. John Kerry endorsed Obama by saying "Martin Luther King said that the time is always right to do what is right."
Not all the references have been received well. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton came under fire when she was quoted as saying King's dream of racial equality was realized only when President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
King has "slipped into the realm of symbol that people use and manipulate for their own purposes," McNair said.
Harris-Lacewell said that is something people need to push back against.
"It's not OK to slip into flat memory of who Dr. King was, it does no justice to us and makes him to easy to appropriate," she said. "Every time he gets appropriated, we have to come out and say that's not OK. We do have the ability to speak back."
"What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,880
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,880 |
MLK was a flawed human being...Just like everyone of us. He had a message of peace an equality, very noble ideals in a time of turmoil and racial unrest. He is someone I tell my kids to look up to when it comes to his message.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
...and that my friend, is the long and short of it. He was a man, a man whose life was taken for standing up for what he believed to be right. He was not perfect and never proclaimed to be.
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,093
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,093 |
I have not read the entire thread, but I do not understand why King's personal life is being discussed on page three. What difference does that make on what he stands for. And when I say "stands for" I am refering to him as an icon of equality and justice despite minority status. Who cares if he plagerized or was a womanizer. All of these ad hominem attacks on his character do not change the message in the least. If you want to talk about it, start a "Debunking the myth of MLK" thread and have at it. But stop linking character with message, it does not make sense.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,618 |
You really don't understand why they are trying to denounce his character? LOL.......you're smarter than that!
"What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,093
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,093 |
Yeah, you're right. I was hoping that maybe their comments were only a product of sloppy thinking, but after reading the other thread, my optimism is fading. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
Quote:
Yeah, you're right. I was hoping that maybe their comments were only a product of sloppy thinking, but after reading the other thread, my optimism is fading.
You were actually optimistic about the thinking on this board...
...silly rabbit, trix are for kids!
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,727
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,727 |
Quote:
No, no no....Thats not how it happened. 1st you say"He would go from city to city spreading his message of peace and equality, and once the march was over, the riot began." That is so far from the truth.
No, that's very much the truth! However, IMO, it was the "extremists" and not MLK who were responsible for these things. They "used MLK like a two dollar hooker" to wreak this havic and violence.
Quote:
To begin with, America was in TURMOIL during the 60s. The war was going on and EVERYONE was protesting, students over the war ( see Kent State),
Which is WHY I only brought up "race riots" of that time and NOT war protests, Kent State, etc.....
Quote:
Black people over equality. On the equality issue, there were many factions and groups of people protesting, from extremist, ie Black Panthers and Black Muslims, to the peaceful Dr King. The Black extremist stand was.....we will get equality or we will burn your cities down, which really meant they would burn down the Black neighborhoods( I never really understood that????) I too remember in 1967 and 1968, the cerfew and the tanks rolling up and down the streets at night. I guess the point I'm trying to make is, the roits were already going on, and Dr. King was going from city to city trying to prevent them, not the other way around.
You are right in the fact that MLK did not want such violence, otherwise, you're buying into revisionist history. You see, MLK's message was a great one. But these extremists played much the part of the spoiler. Infiltrating and working to incite such riots.
Look, I WAS THERE IN DAYTON! It was NOT "peacefull".
NDUTYME
So, since you traced your heritage, were your black ancestors those who were saling slaves, or being bought as slaves? Because it could have ended up being either one.
I find it odd just how quickly many in our nation blame whites for "making the purchases", but speak very little about how their very own race sold them like horse flesh. That's another one of those times we only hear "part of the story". IMO, I believe I would want to denounce my African heritage and be proud of my American heritage. And unless you have dual citizenship, you are NOT African!
After all, why would one be proud of a heritage from a place where people sale their own kind like sheep to slaughter?
JMHO
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,880
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,880 |
Quote:
Quote:
Yeah, you're right. I was hoping that maybe their comments were only a product of sloppy thinking, but after reading the other thread, my optimism is fading.
You were actually optimistic about the thinking on this board...
...silly rabbit, trix are for kids!
I hate to have to be the one who has to tell you this but you are no better then most on here. 
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 998
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 998 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,431
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,431 |
Quote:
but most people really don't know a whole lot about him.
I'd say I know a little . The message was a good one, no it was a great one, but the worship of the man is way overboard . Look IMO he would have become a huckster just as his buddies Jessie and Fat Al have become . The man had some strong ideas ( or maybe he plagerized them as well ) but he was first and foremost a salesman like all good public speakers need to be . He sold millions on the ideas that he espoused but history has taught us that in all likelihood had he lived he would have sold out, been marginalized, or discredited with his ...umm..rumored habits . Ghandi he certainly was not . Applaud his message all you want but at least educate yourself about the messenger before we decide to make him a saint. Or maybe I am just too cynical.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 144
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 144 |
Quote:
And the thing is, it was no fault of MLK's. These things were the "opposite" of his message. But many in his very own race used the civil rights movement as a tool to incite violence. Along with the message from Malcom X.
And, um...which of Malcolm X's messages are U referring to??
[color:"green"] Education is when you read the fine print; experience is what you get when you don't.[/color]
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum what does MLK mean.
|
|
![[Linked Image from sternfannetwork.com]](http://www.sternfannetwork.com/forum/images/smilies/Props/munch.gif)