2015 ኦክቶበር 30, ዓርብ

Gandhi's Non-Cooperation & z Famous Salt March !

Non-cooperation
Main article: Non-cooperation movement

Mahatma Gandhi spinning yarn, in the late 1920s
In his famous book Hind Swaraj (1909) Gandhi declared that British rule was established in India with the co-operation of Indians and had survived only because of this co-operation. If Indians refused to co-operate, British rule would collapse and swaraj would come.[92]

With Congress now behind him in 1920, Gandhi had the base to employ non-cooperation, nonviolence and peaceful resistance as his "weapons" in the struggle against the British Raj. His wide popularity among both Hindus and Muslims made his leadership possible; he even convinced the extreme faction of Muslims to support peaceful non-cooperation.[85] The spark that ignited a national protest was overwhelming anger at the Jallianwala Bagh massacre (or Amritsar massacre) of hundreds of peaceful civilians by British troops in Punjab. Many Britons celebrated the action as needed to prevent another violent uprising similar to the Rebellion of 1857, an attitude that caused many Indian leaders to decide the Raj was controlled by their enemies. Gandhi criticised both the actions of the British Raj and the retaliatory violence of Indians. He authored the resolution offering condolences to British civilian victims and condemning the riots which, after initial opposition in the party, was accepted following Gandhi's emotional speech advocating his principle that all violence was evil and could not be justified.[93]

After the massacre and subsequent violence, Gandhi began to focus on winning complete self-government and control of all Indian government institutions, maturing soon into Swaraj or complete individual, spiritual, political independence.[94] During this period, Gandhi claimed to be a "highly orthodox Hindu" and in January 1921 during a speech at a temple in Vadtal, he spoke of the relevance of non-cooperation to Hindu Dharma, "At this holy place, I declare, if you want to protect your 'Hindu Dharma', non-cooperation is first as well as the last lesson you must learn up."[95]


Sabarmati Ashram, Gandhi's home in Gujarat as seen in 2006.
In December 1921, Gandhi was invested with executive authority on behalf of the Indian National Congress. Under his leadership, the Congress was reorganised with a new constitution, with the goal of Swaraj. Membership in the party was opened to anyone prepared to pay a token fee. A hierarchy of committees was set up to improve discipline, transforming the party from an elite organisation to one of mass national appeal. Gandhi expanded his nonviolence platform to include the swadeshi policy—the boycott of foreign-made goods, especially British goods. Linked to this was his advocacy that khadi (homespun cloth) be worn by all Indians instead of British-made textiles. Gandhi exhorted Indian men and women, rich or poor, to spend time each day spinning khadi in support of the independence movement.[96]

Gandhi even invented a small, portable spinning wheel that could be folded into the size of a small typewriter.[97] This was a strategy to inculcate discipline and dedication to weeding out the unwilling and ambitious and to include women in the movement at a time when many thought that such activities were not respectable activities for women. In addition to boycotting British products, Gandhi urged the people to boycott British educational institutions and law courts, to resign from government employment, and to forsake British titles and honours.[98]

"Non-cooperation" enjoyed widespread appeal and success, increasing excitement and participation from all strata of Indian society. Yet, just as the movement reached its apex, it ended abruptly as a result of a violent clash in the town of Chauri Chaura, Uttar Pradesh, in February 1922. Fearing that the movement was about to take a turn towards violence, and convinced that this would be the undoing of all his work, Gandhi called off the campaign of mass civil disobedience.[99] This was the third time that Gandhi had called off a major campaign.[100] Gandhi was arrested on 10 March 1922, tried for sedition, and sentenced to six years' imprisonment. He began his sentence on 18 March 1922. He was released in February 1924 for an appendicitis operation, having served only two years.[101]

Without Gandhi's unifying personality, the Indian National Congress began to splinter during his years in prison, splitting into two factions, one led by Chitta Ranjan Das and Motilal Nehru favouring party participation in the legislatures, and the other led by Chakravarti Rajagopalachari and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, opposing this move. Furthermore, co-operation among Hindus and Muslims, which had been strong at the height of the nonviolence campaign, was breaking down. Gandhi attempted to bridge these differences through many means, including a three-week fast in the autumn of 1924, but with limited success.[102] In this year, Gandhi was persuaded to preside over the Congress session to be held in Belgaum. Gandhi agreed to become president of the session on one condition: that Congressmen should take to wearing homespun khadi. In his long political career, this was the only time when he presided over a Congress session.[103]

Salt Satyagraha (Salt March)
Main article: Salt Satyagraha

Original footage of Gandhi and his followers marching to Dandi in the Salt Satyagraha
Gandhi stayed out of active politics and, as such, the limelight for most of the 1920s. He focused instead on resolving the wedge between the Swaraj Party and the Indian National Congress, and expanding initiatives against untouchability, alcoholism, ignorance, and poverty. He returned to the fore in 1928. In the preceding year, the British government had appointed a new constitutional reform commission under Sir John Simon, which did not include any Indian as its member. The result was a boycott of the commission by Indian political parties. Gandhi pushed through a resolution at the Calcutta Congress in December 1928 calling on the British government to grant India dominion status or face a new campaign of non-cooperation with complete independence for the country as its goal. Gandhi had not only moderated the views of younger men like Subhas Chandra Bose and Jawaharlal Nehru, who sought a demand for immediate independence, but also reduced his own call to a one-year wait, instead of two.[104]

The British did not respond. On 31 December 1929, the flag of India was unfurled in Lahore. 26 January 1930 was celebrated as India's Independence Day by the Indian National Congress meeting in Lahore. This day was commemorated by almost every other Indian organisation. Gandhi then launched a new Satyagraha against the tax on salt in March 1930. This was highlighted by the famous Salt March to Dandi from 12 March to 6 April, where he marched 388 kilometres (241 mi) from Ahmedabad to Dandi, Gujarat to make salt himself. Thousands of Indians joined him on this march to the sea. This campaign was one of his most successful at upsetting British hold on India; Britain responded by imprisoning over 60,000 people.[105]




Unjust Laws by King & Aquinas !

Martin Luther King (Jr.) and Thomas Aquinas on Unjust Law
A re-post. Incidentally, I was rather irritated by this from a post at "Pharyngula":

King found some strength in his church, and I have to respect that. However, he was also blind to the implications of what he was seeing: that perhaps faith was not a source of wisdom and social justice, but seems to be orthogonal to it. His power did not come from his religion, but from the righteousness of his cause, and it's unfortunate that he did not see that.


But of course he did see that the power of the civil rights movement came "from the righteousness" of the cause; he explicitly states it a number of times in speeches and works, and it is blatantly obvious that the point is made in this very letter, because someone with King's background would speak these very ideas of righteousness in theological and even eschatological language, especially when talking to fellow Christians. And it is exasperating to find someone reading the extraordinarily carefully reasoned and constructed argument here (the small example below is just one small example of the many ways in which the letter is far richer than one could possibly see on first reading) and then patronizingly patting the author on the head as if he were a moron. King had a much greater familiarity with and understanding of the underlying basis of nonviolent methods than Myers, one that had arisen through considerable thought and tested through considerable practice; and this work, which despite its short length is one of the great classics of both natural law and civil rights theories, shows this background in spades. Everyone should read it many times; there is something to be learned from it each and every time.

****

In ST 1-2.96.4, Thomas Aquinas argues that laws bind the conscience, i.e., obligate, when and only when they conform to the eternal law, particularly insofar as the eternal law is exhibited in the universal principles of practical reason (a.k.a. natural law). To be just, a law must be good as to:

(1) its end: it must be ordered to the common good;
(2) its author: it must not exceed the jurisdiction of the one who imposes it;
(3) its form: it must not place disproportionate burdens on any of the subjects involved.

A law, however, that is unjust in any of these ways does not impose any obligation. That is, a law ceases to have binding force if any of these is true:

(1) it is not ordered to the common good, but merely to the private good of those who impose it;
(2) it exceeds the authority of those who impose it;
(3) it places disproportionate burdens on any of the people in the community.

An act that does any of these things is, says Aquinas, more like an act of violence than like a law; it may share some features of a just law, but it is not a law in precisely the same sense. Thus Aquinas favorably quotes Augustine as saying that it seems that an unjust law is no law at all. The only way in which an unjust law may obligate is indirectly, namely, when it is clear that disobeying it would lead to evils worse than obeying it.

One thing that is often overlooked is that Aquinas considers an argument (3rd objection) that human laws do not obligate because they sometimes bring injury and loss of character on human beings: they oppress the poor and the humble. And Aquinas accepts it, for those cases in which the hurt induced on anyone is unjust. Oppressive laws are perversions of law, usurpations, acts of violence; no one need have conscientious qualms about disobeying them.

It is this line of reasoning that Martin Luther King, Jr. took up in his famous 1963 Letter from a Birmingham Jail. There he argues that a nonviolent campaign follows four stages:

(1) collection of facts to determine whether injustice actually exists;
(2) negotiation in order to resolve the matter peacefully;
(3) self-purification, in which there is careful preparation for nonviolent direct action;
(4) direct action through nonviolent means.

A major worry, of course, through all of this is breaking the law. To alleviate this worry, King appeals to Aquinas's argument, and does so, I think, more thoroughly and insightfully than is usually thought. King says, "Any law that degrades human personality is unjust. All segregation statutes are unjust because segregation distorts the soul and damages the personality." This move fits very comfortably with Aquinas's acceptance of the argument in the 3rd Objection, which connects the non-obligatoriness of unjust laws with the moral and physical injury they induce. It's not a bare appeal to Aquinas, as it might seem on a superficial reading; Aquinas is not just thrown out there as an authority or as an example. Rather, it's an insightful and reasonable application of Aquinas's argument, one that shows that the natural law position has strength where it counts ¡










ደራሲው !

ይህችን ውድ የሆነች ትንሽ ቁራሽ ህይወት
እንደ አብርሀም ቤት የለኝ
እንደ ሙሴ መቃብሬ ላይታወቅ '
መኖር - መፃፍ ---
ህይወትን በተስፋ ወደፊት እየኖርኩና ወደ|Fም እያስተዋልኩት ¡

                -    ®ሉ ግርማ -  ከደራሲው




2015 ኦክቶበር 29, ሐሙስ

I have a dream by Martin Luther King (Jr.) !

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!

I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of "interposition" and "nullification" -- one day right there in Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.

I have a dream today!

I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, and every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight; "and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see it together."2

This is our hope, and this is the faith that I go back to the South with.

With this faith, we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith, we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith, we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.

And this will be the day -- this will be the day when all of God's children will be able to sing with new meaning:

My country 'tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing.

Land where my fathers died, land of the Pilgrim's pride,

From every mountainside, let freedom ring!

And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true.

And so let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire.

Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York.

Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania.

Let freedom ring from the snow-capped Rockies of Colorado.

Let freedom ring from the curvaceous slopes of California.

But not only that:

Let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia.

Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee.

Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi.

From every mountainside, let freedom ring.

And when this happens, and when we allow freedom ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual:

                Free at last! Free at last!

                Thank God Almighty, we are free at last !











የማያሠራ መኪና !

ይህ (የኛ መንግስት) ልማድ እንጂ ሌላ ምን ሊባል ይችላል ?
zmn¼ kmÒn& bqR A™cƒN ¶lRU™¾… w½t> TWLD ®Y lm´N yì@ER ---
ÒÑM bydréW ªìInt>N A¶½ ?  ያንድ ሠው ያክል እንክዋን አቅም የለውም ---
ምክንያቱም አንድ ሠው እንዳሻው እንደፍላጎቱ ያጣምመዋልና '
LK kNxT ANdts™ eB-mNé ìlT nW '
ነገር ግን ከዚህ የተሻለ ፋይዳ አይኖረውም
ሕዝቡ ከዚህ ረቀቅ ያለ መኪና ሊኖራቸውና የመንግስት ጥማታቸWN btwe& nbR ' በመሆኑም መንግስታት ለራሣቸው ጥቅም ሠዎች ላY ANd_T t:AÑ ìDrG ANdì@êLƒ yì@µy„ ³[W'
ይሁን እንስማማለን ' ÒÑM YU mNGST yt²l Fe&R k™s& ymnx mƒ¶ ylWM ' ግን መንገዱን ለመሣት በሚያደርገው ጥድፊያ ----  አገርን ነፃ a¶w½ MO™BN n© a¶w½ !  MO™BN a¶cFR aNë{M a¶StMRM !  ባገራችን ያለው ጥሩ ማንነት እስካሁን የተከናወነውን aድርጓል !  ----- መንግስት እንቅፋት እየሆነ ባያስቸግር ytál btk³wn nbR '
ምክንያቱም መንግስት ማለት አንዱ ሌላውን ለቀቅ የሚያደርግበት እንደተባለውም የሚያሠራው ሕዝቡን ለቀቅ ማድረግ ሲችል ነው'
LWWE³ NGD kHND (uƒn¼) Æì ·LtcÝ bqR ²lCL½Ñ{ bq½YnT bmNgë[W

yì@¶ÑÝTN እንቅፋት መጋፈጥ አይችሉም ' እናም እነዚህን ሠዎች ፍላጎታቸውን ሚዛን ውስጥ ሣናስገባ በተግባራቸው ብቻ እንዳኝ ካልን ባቡር ሐዲድ ላይ እንቅፋት እንደሚያኖሩት እርኩስ ግለሠቦች ሊፈረጁና ሊቀጡ በተገባቸው ! 







2015 ኦክቶበር 28, ረቡዕ

Gandhi's Detachment !

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi
·         READ

·         EDIT

·         VIEW HISTORY

·         FEEDBACK
·         Article
·         Web sites
·         Bibliography
·         Year in Review
·         Related Content
·         Contributors
Alternate title: Mahatma Gandhi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
·         Introduction
·         Youth
·         England
·         South Africa
·         Resistance and results
·         The religious quest
·         The last phase
·         Place in history
The religious quest
Gandhi’s religious quest dated back to his childhood, the influence of his mother and of his home at Porbandar and Rajkot, but it received a great impetus after his arrival in South Africa. His Quaker friends in Pretoria failed to convert him to Christianity, but they quickened his appetite for religious studies. He was fascinated by Tolstoy’s writings on Christianity, read theQuʾrān in translation, and delved into Hindu scriptures and philosophy. The study of comparative religion, talks with scholars, and his own reading of theological works brought him to the conclusion that all religions were true and yet every one of them was imperfect because they were “interpreted with poor intellects, sometimes with poor hearts, and more often misinterpreted.”
·         IMAGES

·         VIDEOS

·         QUIZZES

·         LISTS
·        
·         http://media-1.web.britannica.com/eb-media/43/76643-003-228C1424.jpg
·         http://media-3.web.britannica.com/eb-media/43/83443-003-15004B3F.jpg
·         http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb-media/95/114895-003-2AF2F5CE.jpg
·        
·        
·         http://media-1.web.britannica.com/eb-media/88/75588-003-CD9F95DC.jpg
Rajchandra, a brilliant young philosopher who became Gandhi’s spiritual mentor, convinced him of “the subtlety and profundity” of Hinduism, the religion of his birth. And it was theBhagavadgita, which Gandhi had first read in London, that became his “spiritual dictionary” and exercised probably the greatest single influence on his life. Two Sanskrit words in the Gitaparticularly fascinated him. One was aparigraha (nonpossession), which implied that man had to jettison the material goods that cramped the life of the spirit and to shake off the bonds of money and property. The other was samabhava (equability), which enjoined him to remain unruffled by pain or pleasure, victory or defeat, and to work without hope of success or fear of failure.
These were not merely counsels of perfection. In the civil case that had brought him to South Africa in 1893, he had persuaded the antagonists to settle their differences out of court. The true function of a lawyer seemed to him “to unite parties riven asunder.” He soon regarded his clients not as purchasers of his services but as friends; they consulted him not only on legal issues but on such matters as the best way of weaning a baby or balancing the family budget. When an associate protested that clients came even on Sundays, Gandhi replied: “A man in distress cannot have Sunday rest.”
Gandhi’s legal earnings reached a peak figure of £5,000 a year, but he had little interest in moneymaking, and his savings were often sunk in his public activities. In Durban and later in Johannesburg, he kept an open table; his house was a virtual hostel for younger colleagues and political coworkers. This was something of an ordeal for his wife, without whose extraordinary patience, endurance, and self-effacement Gandhi could hardly have devoted himself to public causes. As he broke through the conventional bonds of family and property, their life tended to shade into a community life.
Gandhi felt an irresistible attraction to a life of simplicity, manual labour, and austerity. In 1904, after reading John Ruskin’s Unto This Last, a critique of capitalism, he set up a farm at Phoenix near Durban where he and his friends could literally live by the sweat of their brow. Six years later another colony grew up under Gandhi’s fostering care near Johannesburg; it was namedTolstoy Farm after the Russian writer and moralist, whom Gandhi admired and corresponded with. Those two settlements were the precursors of the more famous ashrams (ashramas) in India, at Sabarmati near Ahmedabad (Ahmadabad) and at Sevagram near Wardha.
South Africa had not only prompted Gandhi to evolve a novel technique for political action but also transformed him into a leader of men by freeing him from bonds that make cowards of most men. “Persons in power,” Gilbert Murray prophetically wrote about Gandhi in the Hibbert Journal in 1918, “should be very careful how they deal with a man who cares nothing for sensual pleasure, nothing for riches, nothing for comfort or praise, or promotion, but is simply determined to do what he believes to be right. He is a dangerous and uncomfortable enemy, because his body which you can always conquer gives you so little purchase upon his soul.”







2015 ኦክቶበር 27, ማክሰኞ

ጭቁኖች ዛሬም ሕልም አለን ¡

Ligezalet fiqadegna ina destegna yemihonilet mengist :- kenie yeteshale lemiseruna lemiyawqu lemetazez destegna indemehonie mexen; abzagnawun gizie gin yeteshale yemayawqu ina yemayadergu@ iskahun yaltseda neger new.
Yemir fithawi lmehon, yetegesziwun feqadina simiminet linorew yigebal !
Inie feqije kemismamabet beqer benie maninetina nibret lay andach mebt linorew ayichilim. Kefixum nigusawi wede kefil nigusawi agezaz; kekefil nigusawi agezaz wede diemokrasi yemideregew idiget; legileseb akibirot yemesxet tikikilegna idiget new. Yechainaw felasfa [talaqu Confucius] inquwan sayqer gileseb leager meseret mehonun lemeredat xibeb algodelewum ! lemehonu yih yeminayew diemokrasi lemengist yemechereshaw meshashal yihon ? leziegoch mebt iwuqina mesxet ina maqenajet ayichal yihon ?
mengist gilesebin indeyebelay irasun yechale hayil mequxer iskalchale dires and mengist beiwunet netsa ina yeberalet mengist mehon ayichalewum. Yerasu gulibet ina silxan keirsu [kegilesebu]  indemimenech teredito kezihga yetemexaxene akbirot lisexew yigebal !
Lehulum ziegoch fitihawi lemehon yetezegaje ; iyandandunim gileseb indebalinjera yemiyakebir; lielaw qerto xiqitoch gelel bilew menor bimerxu inquwan yaltegeba adirgo yemaykoxir, begudayachew xalqa yemayigeba; lemin beanie altaqefum yemayil ina baxeqalay yebalinjeranetin ina yewegentegninet halafinetun bemigeba yetewexa mengist bemalem hasiet adergalehu. Indih ayinetun firie mafrat yechale; wediyawum yebeselewun firewun metkat yechale; leteshale fixum, ina yebelexe yetewedede mengist menged yazegajal;
                ---; yetim iwun huno balayim; yezewetir hilmie yih ina yih bicha new ! 

      /from Thoreau’s famous “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience”:- Concluding Remarks/



የሦሮ ክርክሮች !

አብዛኛው ፡ ሰው ፡ በመሆኑም & mNGCTN¥ yì@¶glGlW ¥ b§nInT ¥ AndsW ¥ ±YÒN ¥ ba·lƒ ¥ ANdmk^³ ¥ nW '
እነርሱም ፡ ጦር ፡ ሠራዊቱ & ì@l^]^¶¿{ ¥ aµÞ¿{ ¥ ፖሊሦች ፡ dNB ¥ aSk²Þ¿{* ymµslƒT ¥ ³[W '
baBº¼W ¥ yÀ™L ¥ ngR ¥ Mz³M ¥ Òn ¥ TGb™ ¥ aYªcBM @ ngR ¥ GN ¥
™±[WN ¥KNxT & አፈርና ፡ ድንጋይ ፡ ተርታ ፡ ይፈርጃሉ ' እናም ፡ ከንጨት ፡ ተመጣጣኝ ፡ ፋይዳ ፡ የሚሠጡ ፡ ሰዎችን ፡ መፈብረክ ፡ ይቻላል ' እነዚህ ፡ ከሣርና ፡ ከቁሻሻ ፡ የተሻለ ፡ ከበሬታ ፡ አይገ²ቸውም ' kfrS³ ¥ KWá ¥ ¿@w\> $ ®Ï $ ሚሠጣቸው ፡ ናቸው ' Dኖም & እነዚህ ፡
 [ በመንግሥት ] ፡ እንደተከበሩ ፡ መልካም ፡ ዜጋ ፡ ይቆጠራሉ '
ሌሎች * የህግ ፡ ሠዎች ፡ ፖለቲከኞች & ዳኞች & ሚኒስትሮች & እና ፡ የቢሮ ፡ ሠዎች ፡ መንግሥትን ፡ በጭንቅላታቸው ፡ ያገለግሉታል ' እናም ፡ የሞራል ፡ ምዘና ፡ ስለማያረጉ & ሳያስቡት & እንደእግዚአብሔር ፡ ሁሉ ፡ ዲያብሎስን ፡ ማገልገላቸው ፡ አይቀሬ ፡ ነው ' በጣም ፡ ጥቂቶች ፡ ጀግኖች & አርበኞች & ሰማ˜ታት & የተሐድሦ ፡ ሰዎችና & ሰዎች  ፡ መንግሥትን ፡ በኽሊናቸው፡ ጭምር፡ ያገለግሉታል @ ስለዚህ ፤ ብዙውን ፡ ጊዜ ፡ ዕምቢ ፡ ለማለት ፡ ይገደዳሉ ' በመሆኑም ፡ በመንግሥት ፡ እንደጠላት ፡ ይቆጠራሉ ' “ጠቢብ ፡ ሠው ፡ ፋይዳው ፡ እንደሰው ፡ ብቻ ፡ ANé@ ¥ A™ሡን ፡ አሳልፎ ፡ ሸክላ ፡ ለመኆንና ፡ በቀዳዳ ፡ yì@g²WN ¥ N¨s ¥ lmk®kL ¥ aYÑRM@




                    ጀግናችንን 
           በቀበረነበት ፡ መካነ-መቃብር ፡ ላይ &
     ¶NDM ¥ kbÅ ¥ DM: ¥ aLtcìM ¥ mƒTê¿{N ¥ --- !!!
     MNM ¥ yUYwT ¥ ªÞK ¥ aLtnbbM *
       Fú|ƒ¬ú« $ YzN ¥ wd ¥ M}g& ¥ SNê×L &
             aNDM ¥ wªdR ¥
         ySNBT ¥ tk&S ¥ a®cìM !
     - êRLS ¥ ¿LF (1971 - 1823)
ysR ፡ ዮሐንስ ፡ ሞር ፡ ቀብር ፡ ሥነ-ሥር@¹T ¥ b×ݳ
¡