You’re right. The fact that Dr. King respected human life, (like the lives Saddam took and was still taking) tells me he’d support the war.

“why on earth would someone who advocated non-violence support it?”

If you think Dr. King would respect half of the garbage the U.N. pulls today you are sadly mistaken.

“the group King led during the 60’s)”

This isn’t the 60s, and Dr. King was fortunate enough not to have witnessed 9/11. Dr. King had common sense, and respect for law (which includes international law) and when a dictator like Saddam violates multiple Gulf War Treaties, after our country loses thousands of lives, common sense tells rational people what to do.

I’ll also repeat one of my previous posts:

Seeing as now Dr. King knew better than most what its like to be oppressed I’d say yes, he, being a Christian that cares about people, would be glad to stop the mass torturing and gassing of innocent civillians.

1) King’s wife and son

2) religious leaders like the Pope, the National Council of Churches, and the Southern Christian Leadership Council (the group King led during the 60’s)

3) WMD monitoring experts like Hans Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei of the International Atomic Energy Association. If the UN’s arms monitoring experts thought the invasion was unnecessary, why on earth would someone who advocated non-violence support it?

Please provide any support, whatsoever, for the suggestion that King would have supported the invasion of Iraq (saying that people who disagree with you wear a “tin foil hat” doesn’t count).

Nothing new. But disgusting, nevertheless.

If anything, this ad was bringing attention to wiretapping by GOVERNMENT. Not a left-wing controlled government or a right-wing controlled government… but just government.

Get over it, nothing to see here.

I have a post about this on my website. It seems exploitation is going around.

Don’t act like a typical liberal and act like you can read his mind. But the fact that he fought oppression, and had a heart for the lost and helpless it stands to reason he would support the war, if for no other reason than liberating the Iraqis.

“Also, while it is great that Republicans have stopped opposing Martin Luther King Day”

We should change its name, because a lot of people disagree with what he stands for. We should call it “Civil Rights” day, or something like that. That way it can include everyone. Sound familiar?

“Stop lying for these people, please”

Its not lying. I’m severly critical of Bush at times, though for different reasons than you are I guarantee. If he broke the law (he didn’t) I’ll rail him too. But its not as if we have proof, or that he committed perjury or anything. (ahem)