Memorandum For Record Example: Fill & Download for Free

What we know for certain is that the F.B.I. conducted a coordinated smear campaign in an attempt to discredit Dr. King and to put an end to his civil rights advocacy. J. Edgar Hoover authorized extensive gathering of personal dirt against Dr. King which was eventually used in an attempt to blackmail him into committing suicide and to defame his name and character even after his death.According to the ACLU’s extensive study:The Federal Bureau of Investigation began its smear campaign against Dr. King in the late 1950s under a secretive program entitled "Racial Matters." Over the next decade, the FBI engaged in concerted and illegal harassment and surveillance of Dr. King and other luminaries in the growing civil rights movement. The crusade to discredit Dr. King continued even after his death. Throughout this campaign, no credible evidence of wrongdoing existed to justify the FBI's activities.[1][1][1][1]As for why this information was gathered and how it was used:An FBI memorandum, for example, noted “[w]e are continuing to follow closely King’s activities and giving consideration to every possibility for future similar coverage that will add to our record on King so that in the end he might be discredited and thus be removed from his position of great stature in the Negro community.”In November 1964, the FBI mailed a composite tape from the coverage of hotel rooms in Washington, D.C., San Francisco and Los Angeles to Dr. King. Included with the tape was a letter stating the tape would be released in 34 days and threatening “there is only one thing you can do to prevent this from happening.” Those who read the letter interpreted it as inviting Dr. King to commit suicide.[2][2][2][2]So to give my own personal view, it may indeed be true that the most important American civil rights advocate of the 20th century was unfaithful to his wife. Whether he was or he wasn’t, I am certain that he did other things that were morally wrong, just as I have. I am not a fan of the hero myth that we tend to adopt for admirable leaders.Regardless, I can clearly recognize the campaign to defame his character as the enduring weapon of white supremacy that it was and is. It is the same one that led the New York Times, which is supposed to be an incredibly biased Liberal paper, to lead an article about a young man who had been wrongfully murdered by an agent of the state with the observation that “Michael Brown… was no angel.”[3][3][3][3]If others want to discount the truth that Dr. King spoke because of a racist smear campaign by a government that felt threatened by him, all I can do is observe that such was the exact purpose of said campaign, and that it seems to have succeeded.As for myself, I believe that I have seen sufficient evidence of the content of his character to make my own judgement.Footnotes[1] ACLU Releases Report on FBI Crusade Against Martin Luther King Jr.; Urges Ashcroft Not to Relax Spying Guidelines Drafted After Shameful Campaign[1] ACLU Releases Report on FBI Crusade Against Martin Luther King Jr.; Urges Ashcroft Not to Relax Spying Guidelines Drafted After Shameful Campaign[1] ACLU Releases Report on FBI Crusade Against Martin Luther King Jr.; Urges Ashcroft Not to Relax Spying Guidelines Drafted After Shameful Campaign[1] ACLU Releases Report on FBI Crusade Against Martin Luther King Jr.; Urges Ashcroft Not to Relax Spying Guidelines Drafted After Shameful Campaign[2] The Dangers of Domestic Spying by Federal Law Enforcement: A Case Study of FBI Surveillance of Dr. Martin Luther King[2] The Dangers of Domestic Spying by Federal Law Enforcement: A Case Study of FBI Surveillance of Dr. Martin Luther King[2] The Dangers of Domestic Spying by Federal Law Enforcement: A Case Study of FBI Surveillance of Dr. Martin Luther King[2] The Dangers of Domestic Spying by Federal Law Enforcement: A Case Study of FBI Surveillance of Dr. Martin Luther King[3] Michael Brown Spent Last Weeks Grappling With Problems and Promise[3] Michael Brown Spent Last Weeks Grappling With Problems and Promise[3] Michael Brown Spent Last Weeks Grappling With Problems and Promise[3] Michael Brown Spent Last Weeks Grappling With Problems and Promise

Alriiiight Alriiiight Alriiiight !!!!Let me write-down what I know about the Congolese genocide which was devastating and ruinous genocide during the Second World War II.Since the seizure of power in Rwanda by the victory of the patriotic army of Paul Kagame in Kigali, Since independence, regional conflicts have been deported to the East of the DRC, more precisely in the province of Kivu. Indeed, “Kivu is known because of its numerous mineral resources is often called the capital of the coluant of Africa coveted by the bordering countries in particular Rwanda, Uganda and Burundi”.Americans investigators also uncovered Kagame’s crimes going back to 1994. Examples are The Gersony Report by Robert Gersony, the Information Memorandum for Secretary of State Warren Christopher by then-Assistant Secretary of State for Africa George Moose, Christian Davenport and Allan C. Stam’s “What Really Happened in Rwanda”, and The Accidental Genocide by Peter Erlinder. Add to these Suisse’s Carla Del Ponte’s Memoirs and Australia’s Michael Hourigan’s Affidavit.Paul Kagame’s toll has surpassed that of Adolf Hitler. As the New York Times wrote in 2010 in “Congo killing fields worse than holocaust“, 6.9 millions have died in DRC alone; and, when extrapolated to today, over 8 millions have died in DRC alone. Add to this the 500, 000 Hutu and Tutsi refugees and Zairians slaughtered in 1996 to 1998, the 550 to 800 thousands of mostly Hutus and moderate Tutsis slaughtered in 1994 in Rwanda, and the over 200, 000 Congolese soldiers and civilians killed by Joseph Kabila throughout DRC and you get a total of nearly 10 million lives destroyed by Paul Kagame, Yoweri Museveni and Joseph Kabila.This trio’s culpability is amply documented in the October 1, 2010’s UN “Report of the Mapping Exercise Documenting the Most Serious Violations of Human Rights and International Law Committed within the Territory of the Democratic Republic of the Congo between March 1993 and June 2003“. The crimes detailed “…in this report reveal a number of inculpatory elements that, if proven before a competent court, could be characterized as crimes of genocide.”Can whole World be silent and “look the other way” while this trio continues to slaughter and rape because of whatever we get from the DRC through their bloody hands when Rwanda could get it from Congolese themselves without people dying or little girls being gang raped?Under this Great Pyramid of atrocities, why would Bill Clinton, Tony Blair and other corrupt African Presidents, Medias, and Individuals want to continue to hold Paul Kagame’s bloody hands and continue to protect him and his holocaust-like record?

From your other activity on Quora, I get the impression you live in the United States. Is that correct? I will frame my answer under that assumption.In the United States, it is generally unlawful to discriminate on the basis of either national origin or sex in hiring. But the situation you have described may fall into an exception to the general prohibition on discrimination.Employment discrimination on the basis of national origin and/or sex is permissible whenever the employee’s national origin and/or sex is a bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) for the job. “Authenticity” can be a BFOQ. The Interpretive Memorandum for Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which is published in the Congressional Record as part of the Act’s legislative history, specifically provides "the preference of a French restaurant for a French cook” as an example of a legitimate authenticity-based BFOQ.Of course, whether authenticity is a BFOQ for the job of working as a server in a Chinese restaurant may depend on what kind of Chinese restaurant you’re talking about. At a fine dining restaurant that serves authentic Chinese cuisine, the employer can legitimately claim that it it is providing diners a culturally authentic dining experience along with the food it serves. If the restaurant’s goal is to provide diners with a culturally authentic dining experience, then it can require its servers to be of Chinese national origin. The restaurant can also require its servers to be able to speak Chinese and to have first-hand knowledge of the country’s culture and customs, despite the fact that imposing these job requirements tends to exclude people of other national origins.At Panda Express, on the other hand, nobody in their right mind would claim that customers are receiving either authentic Chinese cuisine or a culturally authentic dining experience. It would not be lawful for Panda Express to discriminate on the basis of either national origin or sex in its hiring.