កិច្ចព្រមព្រៀង ទីក្រុងប៉ារីស, ២៣ តុលា ១៩៩១ | Paris Peace Agreements , 23 October 1991

Tuesday, January 17, 2017

PM Makes Move to End Future Talks With CNRP

Mr. Rainsy said on Monday that “Hun Sen’s zigzagging moves reflect his disarray following his many failures to divide the opposition CNRP.”

The opposition leader said it was in fact his idea to officially appoint a “leader of a shadow cabinet,” which became the minority leader, and that Mr. Hun Sen’s repeated efforts to use the position to split him and Mr. Sokha had failed.

“Hence Hun Sen’s disarray leading to his decision to simply suppress that minority leader position altogether,” he said.

“For me the minority leader position is important in that its creation represents an institutionalization of the opposition in a country like Cambodia where a one-party system had been the norm for a long time and the opposition could be any time subject to elimination,” he added.

“Hun Sen’s latest decision is therefore another serious setback for democracy in Cambodia.”
 PM Makes Move to End Future Talks With CNRP

 The Cambodia Daily | 17 January 2017

Prime Minister Hun Sen announced through a government mouthpiece on Monday that he intends to rewrite the National Assembly’s internal rules so that there will be no mechanism to hold formal political discussions with the opposition party.

The move to alter Article 48 of the Assembly’s internal rules, which the parties originally agreed to during negotiations after the 2013 election, would strip the CNRP of its parliamentary standing as the “minority group,” strip acting CNRP President Kem Sokha of his title of “minority leader” and eliminate the framework for political negotiations.

Opposition leader Sam Rainsy, left, shakes hands with Prime Minister Hun Sen after the National Assembly approved the composition of the new National Election Committee. (Siv Channa/The Cambodia Daily)

John Lewis, Donald Trump, and the Meaning of Legitimacy


Only a heedless few would attempt to dismiss a man who remains nearly alone in his capacity to tell the story of race in America.

newyorker.com|By David Remnick
[excerpts]

One can agree or not with Lewis when he calls Trump’s legitimacy into doubt. What cannot be doubted is Lewis’s exemplary life, his moral gravity and authority. He is the rare figure who reminds a people of the fragility of their freedoms and puts his body on the line to protect and demand them. In his astonishing memoir, “Walking with the Wind,” Lewis remembers Bloody Sunday in Selma, the disorienting quiet, the discipline of the marchers, the sobriety, “almost like a funeral procession”:
There was no singing, no shouting—just the sound of scuffling feet. There was something holy about it, as if we were walking down a sacred path. It reminded me of Gandhi’s march to the sea. Dr. King used to say there is nothing more powerful than the rhythm of marching feet, and that was what this was, the marching feet of a determined people.
Lewis was at the head of the long double-file line. He wore a tan raincoat and carried a knapsack containing a book and a couple of pieces of fruit, just in case he got hungry later in jail. The protesters were facing off against countless blue-helmeted Alabama state troops armed with whips and truncheons. Lewis saw one trooper with a rubber hose wrapped in barbed wire. The streets were lined with “about a hundred whites, laughing and hollering, waving Confederate flags.” Lewis could hear one trooper’s horse snort and wheeze.

Given one minute to disperse by the troopers, Lewis had the protesters kneel in prayer. They would not leave. “And then they were upon us.” The troopers charged, and the first among them brought down a nightstick on the left side of Lewis’s skull. His legs gave way. “I really thought I was going to die,” he said. He curled up on the ground, as he had been trained, in a “prayer for protection” position.” The trooper hit him again. And then came the canisters of tear gas. His skull fractured, his coat a mess of mud and blood, Lewis refused to go to the hospital. Barely conscious, he reached Brown Chapel, the headquarters of the movement, ascended to the pulpit, and told those gathered, many of them still gasping from the tear gas, “I don’t know how President Johnson can send troops to Vietnam. I don’t see how he can send troops to the Congo. I don’t see how he can send troops to Africa, and he can’t send troops to Selma, Alabama. Next time we march, we may have to keep going when we get to Montgomery. We may have to go on to Washington.”

That night, an audience of forty-eight million people watched a fifteen-minute report on Selma. President Lyndon B. Johnson, who had urged civil-rights leaders to force his hand if they wanted him to support a voting-rights bill, now saw that it was time to promote one. On national television, he compared Selma to Lexington and Concord as a “turning point in man’s unending search for freedom.” And the Voting Rights Act—now under assault in many ways—became law.

"Darkness cannot drive out darkness..." - Martin Luther King, Jr.

Image may contain: text

Obama’s Secret to Surviving the White House Years: Books

President Obama in the Oval Office during an interview with Michiko Kakutani on Friday. Credit Doug Mills/The New York Times        

Obama’s Secret to Surviving the White House Years: Books

New York Times | 16 January 2017

Not since Lincoln has there been a president as fundamentally shaped — in his life, convictions and outlook on the world — by reading and writing as Barack Obama.

Last Friday, seven days before his departure from the White House, Mr. Obama sat down in the Oval Office and talked about the indispensable role that books have played during his presidency and throughout his life — from his peripatetic and sometimes lonely boyhood, when “these worlds that were portable” provided companionship, to his youth when they helped him to figure out who he was, what he thought and what was important.

During his eight years in the White House — in a noisy era of information overload, extreme partisanship and knee-jerk reactions — books were a sustaining source of ideas and inspiration, and gave him a renewed appreciation for the complexities and ambiguities of the human condition.

“At a time when events move so quickly and so much information is transmitted,” he said, reading gave him the ability to occasionally “slow down and get perspective” and “the ability to get in somebody else’s shoes.” These two things, he added, “have been invaluable to me. Whether they’ve made me a better president I can’t say. But what I can say is that they have allowed me to sort of maintain my balance during the course of eight years, because this is a place that comes at you hard and fast and doesn’t let up.”


The writings of Lincoln, the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., Gandhi and Nelson Mandela, Mr. Obama found, were “particularly helpful” when “what you wanted was a sense of solidarity,” adding “during very difficult moments, this job can be very isolating.” “So sometimes you have to sort of hop across history to find folks who have been similarly feeling isolated, and that’s been useful.” There is a handwritten copy of the Gettysburg Address in the Lincoln Bedroom, and sometimes, in the evening, Mr. Obama says, he would wander over from his home office to read it.


President Obama in the Oval Office in 2012. Credit Damon Winter/The New York Times

[Demographic Vietnamization: Elections]គ.ជ.ប. សម្រេច​ លុប​ឈ្មោះ​ វៀតណាម​ ២​នាក់​ ក្នុង​ចំណោម​ បណ្ដឹង​ សូម លុប​ឈ្មោះ ១៨១​នាក់

ប្រជាពលរដ្ឋ​នៅ​ឃុំ​កំពង់ចិនត្បូង ស្រុក​ស្ទោង ខេត្ត​កំពង់ធំ ពិនិត្យ​បញ្ជី​ឈ្មោះ​បោះឆ្នោត​នៅ​រសៀល​ថ្ងៃ​ទី​៦ ខែ​មករា ឆ្នាំ​២០១៧។ Photo Provided
ប្រជាពលរដ្ឋ​នៅ​ឃុំ​កំពង់ចិនត្បូង ស្រុក​ស្ទោង ខេត្ត​កំពង់ធំ ពិនិត្យ​បញ្ជី​ឈ្មោះ​បោះឆ្នោត​នៅ​រសៀល​ថ្ងៃ​ទី​៦ ខែ​មករា ឆ្នាំ​២០១៧។ Photo Provided

គ.ជ.ប. សម្រេច​ លុប​ឈ្មោះ​ វៀតណាម​ ២​នាក់​ ក្នុង​ចំណោម​ បណ្ដឹង​ សូម លុប​ឈ្មោះ ១៨១​នាក់

RFA / វិទ្យុ អាស៊ី សេរី | ១៦ មករា ២០១៧

 




ក្រុម​ប្រឹក្សា​ ជំនុំ​ជម្រះ​ គណៈកម្មាធិការ​ ជាតិ ​រៀបចំ​ ការ​បោះឆ្នោត (..ប.) សម្រេច​ លុប​ឈ្មោះ​ ជនជាតិ​ វៀតណាម ២​នាក់​ ចេញ​ ពី​បញ្ជី​ ចុះ​ឈ្មោះ​ បោះឆ្នោត​ថ្មី ក្នុង​ចំណោម​ បណ្ដឹង​ តវ៉ា​ សូម លុប​ឈ្មោះ ១៨១​នាក់។

ប្រធាន​ ..ប. និង​ជា​ប្រធាន ​ក្រុម​ប្រឹក្សា​ ជំនុំ​ជម្រះ លោក ស៊ិក ប៊ុនហុក ថ្លែង​ ក្នុង​សន្និសីទ ​កាសែត​ នៅ​យប់​ ថ្ងៃ​ទី​១៦ មករា ថា, ក្នុង​ចំណោម ​បណ្ដឹង​ តវ៉ា​ សូម លុប​ឈ្មោះ​ ជន​បរទេស ១៨១​នាក់, ក្រុម​ប្រឹក្សា​ ជំនុំ​ជម្រះ គ..ប. សម្រេច​ លុប​ឈ្មោះ​ ជនជាតិ​ វៀតណាម ២​នាក់​ ចេញ​ ពី​បញ្ជី​ ចុះ​ឈ្មោះ​ បោះឆ្នោត ​ថ្មី​ ឆ្នាំ​២០១៦។

ILO Warns of Brexit ThreatTo Garments

 ILO Warns of Brexit ThreatTo Garments

 The Cambodia Daily | 17 January 2017
 
Cambodia’s critical garment export sector could face major risks in both the short and long term from the U.K.’s surprise vote last year to exit the E.U., the International Labor Organization (ILO) has warned.

And while new duty-free access to the U.S. for some items offers a ray of hope, Cambodia’s recent rise to lower-middle income status could also add to its challenges in a few years, it says.

International Labor Organization wage specialist Malte Luebker speaks at the launch of a new quarterly bulletin on Cambodia’s garment industry in Phnom Penh in 2015 (Siv Channa/The Cambodia Daily)

[Demographic Vietnamization] Election Committee Rejects CNRP’s Foreign Voter Complaints

 Election Committee Rejects CNRP’s Foreign Voter Complaints

 The Cambodia Daily | 17 January 2017

The National Election Committee (NEC) on Monday said that more than 180 suspected illegal voters—mostly Vietnamese accused by the opposition of having improperly registered—can cast ballots in the June commune elections.

The opposition said last Tuesday that it was planning to submit complaints to the NEC about almost 5,000 foreign voters—mostly Vietnamese—whom it accused of not having proper citizenship papers and argued should not be allowed to vote.

National Election Committee President Sik Bunhok, center, speaks at a news conference in Phnom Penh on Monday. (Siv Channa/The Cambodia Daily)

"Letter from a Birmingham Jail" -- In celebration of Martin Luther King Day

Image may contain: one or more people and text

"Letter from a Birmingham Jail"

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
16 April 1963

My Dear Fellow Clergymen:

While confined here in the Birmingham city jail, I came across your recent statement calling my present activities "unwise and untimely." Seldom do I pause to answer criticism of my work and ideas. If I sought to answer all the criticisms that cross my desk, my secretaries would have little time for anything other than such correspondence in the course of the day, and I would have no time for constructive work. But since I feel that you are men of genuine good will and that your criticisms are sincerely set forth, I want to try to answer your statement in what I hope will be patient and reasonable terms.


I think I should indicate why I am here in Birmingham, since you have been influenced by the view which argues against "outsiders coming in." I have the honor of serving as president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, an organization operating in every southern state, with headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia. We have some eighty five affiliated organizations across the South, and one of them is the Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights. Frequently we share staff, educational and financial resources with our affiliates. Several months ago the affiliate here in Birmingham asked us to be on call to engage in a nonviolent direct action program if such were deemed necessary. We readily consented, and when the hour came we lived up to our promise. So I, along with several members of my staff, am here because I was invited here. I am here because I have organizational ties here.

But more basically, I am in Birmingham because injustice is here. Just as the prophets of the eighth century B.C. left their villages and carried their "thus saith the Lord" far beyond the boundaries of their home towns, and just as the Apostle Paul left his village of Tarsus and carried the gospel of Jesus Christ to the far corners of the Greco Roman world, so am I compelled to carry the gospel of freedom beyond my own home town. Like Paul, I must constantly respond to the Macedonian call for aid.

Moreover, I am cognizant of the interrelatedness of all communities and states. I cannot sit idly by in Atlanta and not be concerned about what happens in Birmingham. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. Never again can we afford to live with the narrow, provincial "outside agitator" idea. Anyone who lives inside the United States can never be considered an outsider anywhere within its bounds.

You deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations. I am sure that none of you would want to rest content with the superficial kind of social analysis that deals merely with effects and does not grapple with underlying causes. It is unfortunate that demonstrations are taking place in Birmingham, but it is even more unfortunate that the city's white power structure left the Negro community with no alternative.

In any nonviolent campaign there are four basic steps: collection of the facts to determine whether injustices exist; negotiation; self purification; and direct action. We have gone through all these steps in Birmingham. There can be no gainsaying the fact that racial injustice engulfs this community. Birmingham is probably the most thoroughly segregated city in the United States. Its ugly record of brutality is widely known. Negroes have experienced grossly unjust treatment in the courts. There have been more unsolved bombings of Negro homes and churches in Birmingham than in any other city in the nation. These are the hard, brutal facts of the case. On the basis of these conditions, Negro leaders sought to negotiate with the city fathers. But the latter consistently refused to engage in good faith negotiation.

Then, last September, came the opportunity to talk with leaders of Birmingham's economic community. In the course of the negotiations, certain promises were made by the merchants--for example, to remove the stores' humiliating racial signs. On the basis of these promises, the Reverend Fred Shuttlesworth and the leaders of the Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights agreed to a moratorium on all demonstrations. As the weeks and months went by, we realized that we were the victims of a broken promise. A few signs, briefly removed, returned; the others remained. As in so many past experiences, our hopes had been blasted, and the shadow of deep disappointment settled upon us. We had no alternative except to prepare for direct action, whereby we would present our very bodies as a means of laying our case before the conscience of the local and the national community. Mindful of the difficulties involved, we decided to undertake a process of self purification. We began a series of workshops on nonviolence, and we repeatedly asked ourselves: "Are you able to accept blows without retaliating?" "Are you able to endure the ordeal of jail?" We decided to schedule our direct action program for the Easter season, realizing that except for Christmas, this is the main shopping period of the year. Knowing that a strong economic-withdrawal program would be the by product of direct action, we felt that this would be the best time to bring pressure to bear on the merchants for the needed change.

Then it occurred to us that Birmingham's mayoral election was coming up in March, and we speedily decided to postpone action until after election day. When we discovered that the Commissioner of Public Safety, Eugene "Bull" Connor, had piled up enough votes to be in the run off, we decided again to postpone action until the day after the run off so that the demonstrations could not be used to cloud the issues. Like many others, we waited to see Mr. Connor defeated, and to this end we endured postponement after postponement. Having aided in this community need, we felt that our direct action program could be delayed no longer.

You may well ask: "Why direct action? Why sit ins, marches and so forth? Isn't negotiation a better path?" You are quite right in calling for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word "tension." I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood. The purpose of our direct action program is to create a situation so crisis packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation. I therefore concur with you in your call for negotiation. Too long has our beloved Southland been bogged down in a tragic effort to live in monologue rather than dialogue.

One of the basic points in your statement is that the action that I and my associates have taken in Birmingham is untimely. Some have asked: "Why didn't you give the new city administration time to act?" The only answer that I can give to this query is that the new Birmingham administration must be prodded about as much as the outgoing one, before it will act. We are sadly mistaken if we feel that the election of Albert Boutwell as mayor will bring the millennium to Birmingham. While Mr. Boutwell is a much more gentle person than Mr. Connor, they are both segregationists, dedicated to maintenance of the status quo. I have hope that Mr. Boutwell will be reasonable enough to see the futility of massive resistance to desegregation. But he will not see this without pressure from devotees of civil rights. My friends, I must say to you that we have not made a single gain in civil rights without determined legal and nonviolent pressure. Lamentably, it is an historical fact that privileged groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily. Individuals may see the moral light and voluntarily give up their unjust posture; but, as Reinhold Niebuhr has reminded us, groups tend to be more immoral than individuals.

We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct action campaign that was "well timed" in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word "Wait!" It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This "Wait" has almost always meant "Never." We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that "justice too long delayed is justice denied."

We have waited for more than 340 years for our constitutional and God given rights. The nations of Asia and Africa are moving with jetlike speed toward gaining political independence, but we still creep at horse and buggy pace toward gaining a cup of coffee at a lunch counter. Perhaps it is easy for those who have never felt the stinging darts of segregation to say, "Wait." But when you have seen vicious mobs lynch your mothers and fathers at will and drown your sisters and brothers at whim; when you have seen hate filled policemen curse, kick and even kill your black brothers and sisters; when you see the vast majority of your twenty million Negro brothers smothering in an airtight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society; when you suddenly find your tongue twisted and your speech stammering as you seek to explain to your six year old daughter why she can't go to the public amusement park that has just been advertised on television, and see tears welling up in her eyes when she is told that Funtown is closed to colored children, and see ominous clouds of inferiority beginning to form in her little mental sky, and see her beginning to distort her personality by developing an unconscious bitterness toward white people; when you have to concoct an answer for a five year old son who is asking: "Daddy, why do white people treat colored people so mean?"; when you take a cross county drive and find it necessary to sleep night after night in the uncomfortable corners of your automobile because no motel will accept you; when you are humiliated day in and day out by nagging signs reading "white" and "colored"; when your first name becomes "nigger," your middle name becomes "boy" (however old you are) and your last name becomes "John," and your wife and mother are never given the respected title "Mrs."; when you are harried by day and haunted by night by the fact that you are a Negro, living constantly at tiptoe stance, never quite knowing what to expect next, and are plagued with inner fears and outer resentments; when you are forever fighting a degenerating sense of "nobodiness"--then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait. There comes a time when the cup of endurance runs over, and men are no longer willing to be plunged into the abyss of despair. I hope, sirs, you can understand our legitimate and unavoidable impatience. You express a great deal of anxiety over our willingness to break laws. This is certainly a legitimate concern. Since we so diligently urge people to obey the Supreme Court's decision of 1954 outlawing segregation in the public schools, at first glance it may seem rather paradoxical for us consciously to break laws. One may well ask: "How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?" The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that "an unjust law is no law at all."

Now, what is the difference between the two? How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law. Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust. All segregation statutes are unjust because segregation distorts the soul and damages the personality. It gives the segregator a false sense of superiority and the segregated a false sense of inferiority. Segregation, to use the terminology of the Jewish philosopher Martin Buber, substitutes an "I it" relationship for an "I thou" relationship and ends up relegating persons to the status of things. Hence segregation is not only politically, economically and sociologically unsound, it is morally wrong and sinful. Paul Tillich has said that sin is separation. Is not segregation an existential expression of man's tragic separation, his awful estrangement, his terrible sinfulness? Thus it is that I can urge men to obey the 1954 decision of the Supreme Court, for it is morally right; and I can urge them to disobey segregation ordinances, for they are morally wrong.

Let us consider a more concrete example of just and unjust laws. An unjust law is a code that a numerical or power majority group compels a minority group to obey but does not make binding on itself. This is difference made legal. By the same token, a just law is a code that a majority compels a minority to follow and that it is willing to follow itself. This is sameness made legal. Let me give another explanation. A law is unjust if it is inflicted on a minority that, as a result of being denied the right to vote, had no part in enacting or devising the law. Who can say that the legislature of Alabama which set up that state's segregation laws was democratically elected? Throughout Alabama all sorts of devious methods are used to prevent Negroes from becoming registered voters, and there are some counties in which, even though Negroes constitute a majority of the population, not a single Negro is registered. Can any law enacted under such circumstances be considered democratically structured?

Sometimes a law is just on its face and unjust in its application. For instance, I have been arrested on a charge of parading without a permit. Now, there is nothing wrong in having an ordinance which requires a permit for a parade. But such an ordinance becomes unjust when it is used to maintain segregation and to deny citizens the First-Amendment privilege of peaceful assembly and protest.

I hope you are able to see the distinction I am trying to point out. In no sense do I advocate evading or defying the law, as would the rabid segregationist. That would lead to anarchy. One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty. I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law.


Of course, there is nothing new about this kind of civil disobedience. It was evidenced sublimely in the refusal of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego to obey the laws of Nebuchadnezzar, on the ground that a higher moral law was at stake. It was practiced superbly by the early Christians, who were willing to face hungry lions and the excruciating pain of chopping blocks rather than submit to certain unjust laws of the Roman Empire. To a degree, academic freedom is a reality today because Socrates practiced civil disobedience. In our own nation, the Boston Tea Party represented a massive act of civil disobedience.

We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was "legal" and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was "illegal." It was "illegal" to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler's Germany. Even so, I am sure that, had I lived in Germany at the time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers. If today I lived in a Communist country where certain principles dear to the Christian faith are suppressed, I would openly advocate disobeying that country's antireligious laws.

I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and that when they fail in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress. I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that the present tension in the South is a necessary phase of the transition from an obnoxious negative peace, in which the Negro passively accepted his unjust plight, to a substantive and positive peace, in which all men will respect the dignity and worth of human personality. Actually, we who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive. We bring it out in the open, where it can be seen and dealt with. Like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured.

In your statement you assert that our actions, even though peaceful, must be condemned because they precipitate violence. But is this a logical assertion? Isn't this like condemning a robbed man because his possession of money precipitated the evil act of robbery? Isn't this like condemning Socrates because his unswerving commitment to truth and his philosophical inquiries precipitated the act by the misguided populace in which they made him drink hemlock? Isn't this like condemning Jesus because his unique God consciousness and never ceasing devotion to God's will precipitated the evil act of crucifixion? We must come to see that, as the federal courts have consistently affirmed, it is wrong to urge an individual to cease his efforts to gain his basic constitutional rights because the quest may precipitate violence. Society must protect the robbed and punish the robber. I had also hoped that the white moderate would reject the myth concerning time in relation to the struggle for freedom. I have just received a letter from a white brother in Texas. He writes: "All Christians know that the colored people will receive equal rights eventually, but it is possible that you are in too great a religious hurry. It has taken Christianity almost two thousand years to accomplish what it has. The teachings of Christ take time to come to earth." Such an attitude stems from a tragic misconception of time, from the strangely irrational notion that there is something in the very flow of time that will inevitably cure all ills. Actually, time itself is neutral; it can be used either destructively or constructively. More and more I feel that the people of ill will have used time much more effectively than have the people of good will. We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the hateful words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people. Human progress never rolls in on wheels of inevitability; it comes through the tireless efforts of men willing to be co workers with God, and without this hard work, time itself becomes an ally of the forces of social stagnation. We must use time creatively, in the knowledge that the time is always ripe to do right. Now is the time to make real the promise of democracy and transform our pending national elegy into a creative psalm of brotherhood. Now is the time to lift our national policy from the quicksand of racial injustice to the solid rock of human dignity.

You speak of our activity in Birmingham as extreme. At first I was rather disappointed that fellow clergymen would see my nonviolent efforts as those of an extremist. I began thinking about the fact that I stand in the middle of two opposing forces in the Negro community. One is a force of complacency, made up in part of Negroes who, as a result of long years of oppression, are so drained of self respect and a sense of "somebodiness" that they have adjusted to segregation; and in part of a few middle-class Negroes who, because of a degree of academic and economic security and because in some ways they profit by segregation, have become insensitive to the problems of the masses. The other force is one of bitterness and hatred, and it comes perilously close to advocating violence. It is expressed in the various black nationalist groups that are springing up across the nation, the largest and best known being Elijah Muhammad's Muslim movement. Nourished by the Negro's frustration over the continued existence of racial discrimination, this movement is made up of people who have lost faith in America, who have absolutely repudiated Christianity, and who have concluded that the white man is an incorrigible "devil."

I have tried to stand between these two forces, saying that we need emulate neither the "do nothingism" of the complacent nor the hatred and despair of the black nationalist. For there is the more excellent way of love and nonviolent protest. I am grateful to God that, through the influence of the Negro church, the way of nonviolence became an integral part of our struggle. If this philosophy had not emerged, by now many streets of the South would, I am convinced, be flowing with blood. And I am further convinced that if our white brothers dismiss as "rabble rousers" and "outside agitators" those of us who employ nonviolent direct action, and if they refuse to support our nonviolent efforts, millions of Negroes will, out of frustration and despair, seek solace and security in black nationalist ideologies--a development that would inevitably lead to a frightening racial nightmare.

Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever. The yearning for freedom eventually manifests itself, and that is what has happened to the American Negro. Something within has reminded him of his birthright of freedom, and something without has reminded him that it can be gained. Consciously or unconsciously, he has been caught up by the Zeitgeist, and with his black brothers of Africa and his brown and yellow brothers of Asia, South America and the Caribbean, the United States Negro is moving with a sense of great urgency toward the promised land of racial justice. If one recognizes this vital urge that has engulfed the Negro community, one should readily understand why public demonstrations are taking place. The Negro has many pent up resentments and latent frustrations, and he must release them. So let him march; let him make prayer pilgrimages to the city hall; let him go on freedom rides -and try to understand why he must do so. If his repressed emotions are not released in nonviolent ways, they will seek expression through violence; this is not a threat but a fact of history. So I have not said to my people: "Get rid of your discontent." Rather, I have tried to say that this normal and healthy discontent can be channeled into the creative outlet of nonviolent direct action. And now this approach is being termed extremist. But though I was initially disappointed at being categorized as an extremist, as I continued to think about the matter I gradually gained a measure of satisfaction from the label. Was not Jesus an extremist for love: "Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you." Was not Amos an extremist for justice: "Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like an ever flowing stream." Was not Paul an extremist for the Christian gospel: "I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus." Was not Martin Luther an extremist: "Here I stand; I cannot do otherwise, so help me God." And John Bunyan: "I will stay in jail to the end of my days before I make a butchery of my conscience." And Abraham Lincoln: "This nation cannot survive half slave and half free." And Thomas Jefferson: "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal . . ." So the question is not whether we will be extremists, but what kind of extremists we will be. Will we be extremists for hate or for love? Will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice or for the extension of justice? In that dramatic scene on Calvary's hill three men were crucified. We must never forget that all three were crucified for the same crime--the crime of extremism. Two were extremists for immorality, and thus fell below their environment. The other, Jesus Christ, was an extremist for love, truth and goodness, and thereby rose above his environment. Perhaps the South, the nation and the world are in dire need of creative extremists.

Cambodia suspends annual military drill with United States


Cambodia suspends annual military drill with United States

 Reuters | 16 January 2017

Cambodia has suspended joint military exercises with the United States this year that were due to have been held for the eighth year in a row, a defense ministry spokesman said on Monday.

Cambodia was too busy preparing for local elections in June to be able to take part in the Angkor Sentinel exercises, Chhum Socheat said. He rejected any connection to Cambodia's strengthening ties with China.

"Our activities will be reduced, we have a lot of security work to do," Socheat said. The exercises have usually been held in the spring.

A U.S Embassy spokesman in Phnom Penh did not respond to Reuters request for comment on the suspension of the annual drill, which is designed to prepare for natural disasters and humanitarian work as well as to foster military cooperation.

As China's influence in the region has grown, so Cambodia's ties with Beijing have strengthened.

Meanwhile, uncertainty over Washington's commitment to Asia has increased and there are doubts over how policy will develop once Donald Trump becomes U.S. president on Friday.

What Americans thought of the Civil Rights movement in 1964...

Image may contain: text

Cambodia Cancels Military Exercise with US


Cambodia Cancels Military Exercise with US

 AP / VOA |

Cambodia has informed the United States that it is canceling an annual joint military exercise this year, even though planning for the event had already begun.
Defense Ministry spokesman Gen. Chhum Socheath said Monday the Angkor Sentinel exercise had to be postponed because Cambodian forces would be unable to fully participate as a result of two important events: local elections in June and a six-month campaign to eradicate drug-related crime.

U.S. Embassy spokesman Jay Raman confirmed in an e-mail that the exercises for 2017 and 2018 have been canceled. He said military exchanges and training programs are not affected.

Southeast Asian nations, even traditional allies of the United States such as the Philippines, have recently drawn closer to China as Beijing flexes its diplomatic and military muscle in the region.

Monday, January 16, 2017

[Vietnamization: Military occupation] សម រង្ស៊ី / Sam Rainsy: សូម រំលឹក ពីប្រវត្តិសាស្ត្រ ដើម្បី យល់ដឹង ពីការពិត, ហើយ ធានា តុល្យភាព ក្នុងការ ធ្វើវិភាគ | 7 January 1979: Recalling historical facts for the sake of objectivity and balance (The Cambodia Daily, 16 January 2017_

Image may contain: textImage may contain: 1 person, on stage and standing

Image may contain: one or more people, people standing and outdoor

Image may contain: one or more people


១៦ មករា ២០១៧ / 16 January 2017
7 January 1979: Recalling historical facts for the sake of objectivity and balance 

សូម រំលឹក ពីប្រវត្តិសាស្ត្រ ដើម្បី យល់ដឹង ពីការពិត, ហើយ ធានា តុល្យភាព ក្នុងការ ធ្វើវិភាគ
យើង ត្រូវតែ បង្ហាញ ទស្សនៈ មួយទៀត ដែលខុសប្លែក ពីទស្សនៈ របស់ គណបក្ស ប្រជាជន កម្ពុជា ទាក់ទង ទៅនឹង ព្រឹត្តិការណ៍ ថ្ងៃ ៧ មករា ឆ្នាំ១៩៧៩ ពីព្រោះ ព្រឹត្តិការណ៍ ទាំងនោះ គ្រាន់តែ ជាលេស ឲ្យគណបក្ស ប្រជាជន ដឹកនាំប្រទេស កម្ពុជា មកដល់សព្វថ្ងៃ។
មានជនជាតិ ខ្មែរ ច្រើនណាស់, ហើយ ក៏មាន ប្រវត្តិវិទូបរទេស ជាច្រើន នាក់ដែរ ដែលមិនជឿ ពីការ បកស្រាយ របស់ គណបក្ស ប្រជាជន កម្ពុជា ស្តីពី ថ្ងៃ៧ មករា ឆ្នាំ១៩៧៩ ពីព្រោះ ការបកស្រាយ នោះ មើលស្រាល ឬរំលង ចំណុច ដ៏សំខាន់ ដូចតទៅ៖
១. ផែនការណ៍ សម្ងាត់ និងបំណង អាថ៌កំបាំង របស់ ប្រទេស វៀតណាម ក្នុងការ សម្រេច វាយលុក និងគ្រប់គ្រង ប្រទេស កម្ពុជា ចាប់ពីថ្ងៃ ៧ មករា ១៩៧៩ (គេ ចូលមក អន្តរាគមន៍ ក្នុងប្រទេស កម្ពុជា មិនមែន ដោយសារ តែ មនោសញ្ចេតនា មនុស្សធម៌ ប៉ុណ្ណោះទេ)។
២. ពួកខ្មែរ ក្រហម កុម្មុយនីស្ត មិនអាច ដណ្តើមយក អំណាច នៅឆ្នាំ ១៩៧៥ (ហើយ សម្លាប់មនុស្ស រាប់លាននាក់) បានទេ បើ គ្មាន ការគាំទ្រ ពីកងទ័ពយួន កុម្មុយនីស្ត កាលពីដើម ទស្សវត្សរ៍ ឆ្នាំ ១៩៧០។
៣. មេដឹកនាំ គណបក្ស ប្រជាជន កម្ពុជា មិនមែន ជាវីរបុរស ដូចពួកគេ អះអាង នោះទេ។  ពួកគេ ត្រូវ បានកងទ័ព បរទេស ឈ្លានពាន បន្តុប ឲ្យឡើង កាន់អំណាច នៅស្រុកខ្មែរ ដែលបាន ក្លាយទៅ ជាអាណានិគមនិយម ប្រទេស វៀតណាម រហូត មកដល់ សព្វថ្ងៃ។  ពួកគេ ជាអតីត កម្មាភិបាល ខ្មែរក្រហម ឬក៏មេបញ្ជាការ កងទ័ព ខ្មែរក្រហម ដែលបាន គេចខ្លួន ទៅប្រទេស វៀតណាម ច្រើនឆ្នាំ បន្ទាប់ពី ប៉ុល ពត បានចាប់ផ្តើម សម្លាប់ ប្រជារាស្ត្រ ស្លូតត្រង់ ក្នុងទ្រង់ទ្រាយធំ, ហើយ ពួកគេ រត់ទៅ ប្រទេស វៀតណាមនេះ មិនមែន ដោយសារ តែ ពួកគេ មានវិប្បដិសារី អ្វី ចំពោះ ការកាប់សម្លាប់ ប្រជារាស្ត្រ ស្លូតត្រង់ នោះទេ, តែ ពួកគេ រត់ទៅ ចុះចូល បរទេស បែបនេះ គ្រាន់តែ ដើម្បី រួចខ្លួន ពីការ បោសសម្អាត ផ្ទៃក្នុង រវាង ខ្មែរក្រហម និងខ្មែរក្រហម ដូចគ្នា។  ដូច្នេះ ពួកគេ បានក្លាយទៅ ជាអាយ៉ង ឬរណប បរទេស ឈ្លានពាន ដែលមាន មហិច្ឆិតា លេបត្របាក់ ទឹកដី ខ្មែរយើង តាំងពីច្រើន សតវត្សរ៍ មកហើយ។
(ដកស្រង់ពីលិខិតរបស់ខ្ញុំមួយច្បាប់ ចុះផ្សាយក្នុងកាសែត ខេមបូឌាដេលី ថ្ងៃ ១៦ មករា ២០១៧)
It is important to offer a counter-narrative to the CPP's version of events regarding January 7, 1979 because those events constitute a most controversial raison d’être for the regime.
Countless Cambodians and foreign historians are not satisfied with the CPP's version of January 7, 1979 because it misses the following points:
- Vietnam's secret (not only humanitarian) agenda when it decided to invade and occupy Cambodia.
- The communist Khmer Rouge would not have been able to come to power in 1975 (and to kill millions of people) without the support of communist Vietnam in the early 1970s.
- CPP leaders are not heroes as they pretend to be. They were installed in power by a foreign invading army. They were high-ranking Khmer Rouge apparatchiks or military commanders who fled to Vietnam only several years after Pol Pot had started to kill innocent people on a massive scale and they did so, not out of any moral conscience problem, but just to expediently escape Khmer Rouge internal purges. They inevitably became subservient to Cambodia’s very assertive eastern neighboring country.
(Sam Rainsy’s letter published in The Cambodia Daily, 16 January 2017)
សម រង្ស៊ី / Sam Rainsy
www.facebook.com/rainsy.sam.5

[Vietnamization: Border] បទ​វិភាគ៖ បុគ្គលិក​ លក្ខណៈ ​នៃ​ការ​ ដឹកនាំ​ របស់​ លោក ហ៊ុន សែន រយៈពេល ​៣២​ឆ្នាំ |

ទោះ​ ជា​ប៉ះពាល់​ អ្វី​ ក៏​មិន​ថ្វី​ដែរ ឲ្យ​តែ​ បំណង ​របស់​លោក ​បាន​សម្រេច។  ភ័យ​ខ្លាច ​ព្រះមហាក្សត្រ​ កម្ពុជា មិន​ឡាយព្រះហស្ដ លេខា ទទួល​ស្គាល់ ​សន្ធិសញ្ញា​ បំពេញ​បន្ថែម ​ស្ដីពី​ កម្ពុជា-វៀតណាម ឆ្នាំ​២០០៥ នៅ​ថ្ងៃ​ ទី​១៧ ខែ​តុលា ឆ្នាំ​២០០៥, លោក​ នាយក​រដ្ឋមន្ត្រី ហ៊ុន សែន គំរាម​រំលាយ ​រាជា​និយម​ ជំនួស​ មក​វិញ​ នូវ​របប​ សាធារណរដ្ឋ។ [Fearing the King will not sign Supplementary Cambodia-Vietnam Border Treaty 2005 on 17 October 2005, PM Hun Sen threatened to dissolve the Monarchy with  a republic.]

ទោះ​ ជា​យ៉ាង​ណា​ ក៏ដោយ​ចុះ បុរស​ខ្លាំង លោក​ នាយក​រដ្ឋមន្ត្រី ហ៊ុន សែន ហាក់​ដូច ជា​មាន​ ចរិត​ខ្លាច​ សំណួរ​ រសើប។  នៅ​ក្នុង​រាល់ ​យុទ្ធនាការ ​បោះឆ្នោត ​ម្តងៗ ​ក្នុង៥​ អាណត្តិ​ កន្លង​មក​នេះ, គេ​ មិន ​ដែល​ឃើញ​ លោក ហ៊ុន សែន ចេញ​មុខ ​ចូលរួម ក្នុង​វេទិកា​ បើក ​ឲ្យ​មាន​ ការ​សួរ​ ដេញដោល​ ជាមួយ​ បក្ស​នយោបាយ ​ដទៃ។  គេ​ ឃើញ​លោក​ និយាយ​ថ្លែង​ តែ ​ម្នាក់​ឯង ​ច្រើន​ជាង។  នៅ​ក្នុង​រដ្ឋសភា​ ក៏​ដូច្នេះ​ដែរ។  មាន​ម្តង​នោះ​ លោក ​នាយក​រដ្ឋមន្ត្រី​ ទៅ​និយាយ ​ឲ្យ​តំណាង​រាស្ត្រ​ ស្តាប់​ ប្រមាណ ៥​ម៉ោង​ អំពី​ បញ្ហា​ព្រំដែន​ កម្ពុជា-វៀតណាម, ប៉ុន្តែ​ ហាម​សួរ។ [They see the prime minister engages more often in a monologue.  Once, the prime minister lectures Members of Parliament for 5 hours re the Cambodia-Vietnam border, without allowing for questions.]
លោក​នាយក​រដ្ឋមន្ត្រី ហ៊ុន សែន ក្នុង​ពិធី​ខួប​លើក​ទី​៦៥ នៃ​ការ​បង្កើត​គណបក្ស​ប្រជាជន​កម្ពុជា នា​ទីស្នាក់ការ​កណ្ដាល​បក្ស​ខណ្ឌ​ចំការមន រាជធានី​ភ្នំពេញ នៅ​ព្រឹក​ថ្ងៃ​ទី​២៨ ខែ​មិថុនា ឆ្នាំ​២០១៦។ RFA/Brach Chev
លោក​នាយក​រដ្ឋមន្ត្រី ហ៊ុន សែន ក្នុង​ពិធី​ខួប​លើក​ទី​៦៥ នៃ​ការ​បង្កើត​គណបក្ស​ប្រជាជន​កម្ពុជា នា​ទីស្នាក់ការ​កណ្ដាល​បក្ស​ខណ្ឌ​ចំការមន រាជធានី​ភ្នំពេញ នៅ​ព្រឹក​ថ្ងៃ​ទី​២៨ ខែ​មិថុនា ឆ្នាំ​២០១៦។ RFA/Brach Chev

បទ​វិភាគ៖ បុគ្គលិក​ លក្ខណៈ ​នៃ​ការ​ ដឹកនាំ​ របស់​ លោក ហ៊ុន សែន រយៈពេល ​៣២​ឆ្នាំ

RFA / វិទ្យុ អាស៊ី សេរី | ១៥ មករា ២០១៧


លោក​ នាយក​រដ្ឋមន្ត្រី ហ៊ុន សែន កាន់​តំណែង​ ជា​នាយក​រដ្ឋមន្ត្រី​ បាន ៣២ ​ឆ្នាំ​ហើយ មក​ដល់ ថ្ងៃ​ទី​១៤ ខែ​មករា ឆ្នាំ​២០១៧។  លោក ហ៊ុន សែន ស្ថិត​ក្នុង​ ចំណោម​ នាយក​រដ្ឋមន្ត្រី​ កំពុង​ កាន់​តំណែង​ យូរ​ជាង​គេ​ នៅ​លើ​ ពិភពលោក។   តើ​ លោក​ នាយក​រដ្ឋមន្ត្រី ហ៊ុន សែន មាន​បុគ្គលិក​លក្ខណៈ​ បែប​ណា និង​កត្តា​ អ្វី​ខ្លះ ដែល​ធ្វើ​ ឲ្យ​លោក​ កាន់​អំណាច​ បាន​យូរ​ ដូច្នេះ?

HRW៖ ការ​រំលោភ​ សិទ្ធិ​មនុស្ស​ ធ្ងន់ធ្ងរ​​ របស់​ រដ្ឋាភិបាល​ ជា​ការ រារាំង​ ជ័យជំនះ​​ សម្រាប់​ បក្ស​ប្រឆាំង

HRW៖ ការ​រំលោភ​ សិទ្ធិ​មនុស្ស​ ធ្ងន់ធ្ងរ​​ របស់​ រដ្ឋាភិបាល​ ជា​ការ រារាំង​ ជ័យជំនះ​​ សម្រាប់​ បក្ស​ប្រឆាំង

RFA / វិទ្យុ អាស៊ី សេរី | ១៣ មករា ២០១៧

មន្ត្រី​ បក្ស​ប្រជាជន​ ថា, មិន​ ទាន់បាន ​ដំណឹង​ ដែល​ថា​ លោក ហ៊ុន សែន ចង់​លប់ ​ប្រធាន ​ក្រុម​ភាគ​តិច | CPP official says he's yet to receive info saying Hun Sen wants to do away with Minority Leader position

អ្នក​នាំ​ពាក្យ​គណបក្ស​ប្រជាជន​កម្ពុជា លោក សុខ ឥសាន ក្នុង​វេទិកា​អ្នក​ស្ដាប់​វិទ្យុ​អាស៊ីសេរី កាល​ពី​ថ្ងៃ​ទី​១០ ខែ​មីនា ឆ្នាំ​២០១៦។
អ្នក​នាំ​ពាក្យ​គណបក្ស​ប្រជាជន​កម្ពុជា លោក សុខ ឥសាន ក្នុង​វេទិកា​អ្នក​ស្ដាប់​វិទ្យុ​អាស៊ីសេរី កាល​ពី​ថ្ងៃ​ទី​១០ ខែ​មីនា ឆ្នាំ​២០១៦។

មន្ត្រី​ បក្ស​ប្រជាជន​ ថា, មិន​ ទាន់បាន ​ដំណឹង​ ដែល​ថា​ លោក ហ៊ុន សែន ចង់​លប់ ​ប្រធាន ​ក្រុម​ភាគ​តិច

RFA / វិទ្យុ អាស៊ី សេរី | ១៦ មករា ២០១៧

 

អ្នកនាំពាក្យ​ គណបក្ស​ ប្រជាជន​ កម្ពុជា លោក សុខ ឥសាន ឲ្យ​អាស៊ីសេរី​ ដឹង​ នៅ​រសៀល​ ថ្ងៃ​ទី​១៦ ខែ​មករា ថា, លោក​ មិន​ទាន់​ ទទួល​បាន ​ព័ត៌មាន​ ដែល​ថា លោក​ នាយករដ្ឋមន្ត្រី ហ៊ុន សែន លែង​ចង់​ ឲ្យ​មាន​ ប្រធាន​ ក្រុម​មតិ​ ភាគតិច និង​ប្រធាន ​ក្រុម​ថ្នាក់​ដឹកនាំ ​តំណាងរាស្ត្រ​ នោះ​ឡើយ

ការ​បញ្ជាក់ ​របស់​លោក សុខ ឥសាន ធ្វើ​ឡើង​ បន្ទាប់​ ពី​អង្គភាព​ សារព័ត៌មាន ​ហ្វ្រេសញូវ (Fresh News) បាន​ចុះ​ផ្សាយ ​ខណៈ​ លោក ហ៊ុន សែន កំពុង​ ដឹកនាំ​ ប្រតិភូ​ ទៅ​ចូលរួម​ វេទិកា​ សេដ្ឋកិច្ច​ ពិភពលោក​ នៅ​ទីក្រុង​ ដាវ៉ូស នៃ​ប្រទេស ​ស្វីស ថា, លោក ហ៊ុន សែន ស្នើ​ឲ្យ​ ធ្វើ វិសោធនកម្ម​ បទ​បញ្ជា ​ផ្ទៃ​ក្នុង ​រដ្ឋសភា ត្រង់​ប្រការ ​៤៨​ថ្មី (បី) ដើម្បី​ លុប​ចោល ប្រធាន ​ក្រុម​មតិ​ ភាគ​តិច និង​ប្រធាន ​ក្រុម​ថ្នាក់​ដឹកនាំ​ តំណាងរាស្ត្រ បើ​ យន្តការ​ ដែល​ទើប​ បង្កើត​នេះ ពិបាក ​ក្នុង​ការ​ ធ្វើ​ការ, រួម​ទាំង ប៉ុនប៉ង​ ចរចា​ ដោះលែង ​អ្នក​ទោស ដែល​បំពាន​ ដល់​អំណាច​ តុលាការ​ ផង​នោះ។

តួនាទី ប្រធាន ក្រុម​មតិ​ ភាគតិច និង​ប្រធាន​ ក្រុម​ថ្នាក់​ដឹកនាំ​ តំណាងរាស្ត្រ ទើប​ ត្រូវ​ បាន​បង្កើត​ឡើង​ ក្រោយ​ កិច្ច​ចរចា​ បញ្ចប់​ជម្លោះ ​នយោបាយ ​រវាង​ គណបក្ស​ កាន់​អំណាច និង​គណបក្ស​ សង្គ្រោះជាតិ កាល​ពី​ថ្ងៃ​ទី​២២ ខែ​កក្កដា ឆ្នាំ​២០១៤ ដោយ​ដៃគូ​សន្ទនា​ នៅ​ពេល​នោះ គឺ រវាង​ លោក ហ៊ុន សែន និង​លោក សម រង្ស៊ី

ទើប ​តែ​ នៅដើម​ ខែ​ធ្នូ ឆ្នាំ​២០១៦ កន្លង ទៅនេះ, លោក ហ៊ុន សែន បាន​ប្រកាស ​ប្ដូរ​តួនាទី​នេះ មក​ឲ្យ​ ប្រធាន​ ស្ដីទី​ គណបក្ស ​ប្រឆាំង លោក កឹម សុខា ធ្វើ​ដៃ​គូ​ សន្ទនា​ ជាមួយ​ នឹង​លោក បន្ទាប់​ ពី​លោក សម រង្ស៊ី ត្រូវ​ បាន​រដ្ឋាភិបាល​ ហាម​ មិន​ឲ្យ​ ចូល​ប្រទេស។

I HAVE A DREAM -- In celebration of Martin Luther King Day

Image may contain: 1 person, crowd and outdoor

In celebration of Martin Luther King Day, an American federal holiday marking the birthday of Martin Luther King Jr. It is observed on the third Monday of January each year, which is around King's birthday, January 15


Martin Luther King Jr. was an American Baptist minister [pastor] and activist who was a leader in the Civil Rights Movement. He is best known for his role in the advancement of civil rights using nonviolent civil disobedience based on his Christian beliefs. - Wikipedia

I HAVE A DREAM

I am happy to join with you today in what will go down in history as the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation.

Five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand today, signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Negro slaves who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of their captivity.

But one hundred years later, the Negro still is not free. One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. One hundred years later, the Negro is still languished in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land. And so we've come here today to dramatize a shameful condition.

In a sense we've come to our nation's capital to cash a check. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the "unalienable Rights" of "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note, insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad check, a check which has come back marked "insufficient funds."

But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation. And so, we've come to cash this check, a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice.

We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of Now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now is the time to make real the promises of democracy. Now is the time to rise from the dark and desolate valley of segregation to the sunlit path of racial justice. Now is the time to lift our nation from the quicksands of racial injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood. Now is the time to make justice a reality for all of God's children.

It would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment. This sweltering summer of the Negro's legitimate discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of freedom and equality. Nineteen sixty-three is not an end, but a beginning. And those who hope that the Negro needed to blow off steam and will now be content will have a rude awakening if the nation returns to business as usual. And there will be neither rest nor tranquility in America until the Negro is granted his citizenship rights. The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges.

But there is something that I must say to my people, who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice: In the process of gaining our rightful place, we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again, we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force.

The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to a distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. And they have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom.

We cannot walk alone.

And as we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall always march ahead.

We cannot turn back.

There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights, "When will you be satisfied?" We can never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the victim of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality. We can never be satisfied as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities. We cannot be satisfied as long as the negro's basic mobility is from a smaller ghetto to a larger one. We can never be satisfied as long as our children are stripped of their self-hood and robbed of their dignity by signs stating: "For Whites Only." We cannot be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and a Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until "justice rolls down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream."¹

I am not unmindful that some of you have come here out of great trials and tribulations. Some of you have come fresh from narrow jail cells. And some of you have come from areas where your quest -- quest for freedom left you battered by the storms of persecution and staggered by the winds of police brutality. You have been the veterans of creative suffering. Continue to work with the faith that unearned suffering is redemptive. Go back to Mississippi, go back to Alabama, go back to South Carolina, go back to Georgia, go back to Louisiana, go back to the slums and ghettos of our northern cities, knowing that somehow this situation can and will be changed.

Let us not wallow in the valley of despair, I say to you today, my friends.

And so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.

I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I have a dream today!