Posted on 05/26/2019 6:26:43 AM PDT by MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
Secret FBI tapes that accuse Martin Luther King Jr of having extramarital affairs with '40 to 45 women' and even claim he 'looked on and laughed' as a pastor friend raped a parishioner, exist an author has claimed. The civil rights hero was also heard allegedly joking he was the founder of the 'International Association for the Advancement of P***y-Eaters'.
The shocking files could lead to a 'painful historical reckoning' for the man who is celebrated across the world for his campaign against racial injustice, according to one biographer. The FBI surveillance tapes detailing his indiscretions are being held in a vault at the U.S. National Archives and are not due for release until 2027. But David Garrow, a biographer of King who won a Pulitzer Prize for his 1987 book Bearing the Cross about the Baptist minister, has unearthed the FBI summaries of the various incidents.
In an article to be published in Standpoint, Garrow tells how the FBI planted transmitters in two lamps in hotel rooms booked by King in January 1964, according to The Sunday Times.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
“I think the Jefferson foundation disagrees with you, as to the last word on Sally Hemmings.”
You mean it is impossible that the Jefferson foundation is immune from political correctness?
from Wikipedia:
“The controversy dates from the 1790s. Jefferson’s sexual relationship with Hemings was first reported in 1802 by one of Jefferson’s enemies, a political journalist named James T. Callender, after he noticed several light-skinned slaves at Monticello.”
You can read the whole article. None of what you say is written in stone.
Jefferson just didn’t leave us words. He help fashion this nation. Words are cheap.
What you said there, it was the father who had supposedly been a Republican prior to 1960. I believe it was a phone call made to the jail by JFK that precipitated the “change.” JFK’s record as Senator of being pro-civil rights was questionable at best. His father leaned on him hard to strongly discourage Sammy Davis, Jr. from marrying the White actress May Britt, lest that cost him White votes. It was Davis who even remembered that JFK couldn’t even look him in the eye when going to meet him, while Nixon, conversely, gave him a very warm and hearty greeting (why it was a no-brainer in 1972 for Sammy to endorse Nixon, and he was literally baffled by how radicalized the Black community had become and enslaved to the Dems, which MLK Jr. had been a part of making happen).
In any event, if King Jr. or Sr. had felt that warmly and strongly towards Nixon, a single instance of sympathy on behalf of JFK (which was a political move urged by RFK) would, while appreciated, would not have seen the family go all in for JFK. Nixon still received (in 1960) between 1/4th and 1/3rd of the Black vote, the last time any GOP Presidential candidate ever got more than about 10% or so (even his 1972 landslide saw him barely get that figure).
MLK Sr., after his son’s death, was so wedded to the Democrat Party, that he was present at the 1976 Dem Convention to coronate Jimmy Carter, who was barely removed from his race-baiting campaign for Governor in 1970 (where he attacked ex-Gov. Carl Sanders for having the “audacity” to shake hands with Black basketball players).
In any event, I think there was more than a bit of subterfuge on MLK Jr’s part and his strong associations with leftists and Communists (you don’t go to the Highlander Folk School unless you’re big into Marx & Co.). While his messages sounded good, he was NOT a Conservative as some have claimed. He savagely attacked Goldwater (who had a record of being pro-civil rights) as being a tool of Southern racists all because the Senator saw the 1964 CRA as a dramatic overreach of the federal government. That played a substantial role in radicalizing the Black community and pushing the remaining bloc of voting Black Republicans nearly entirely into the Democrat party and the Socialist/Welfare State primrose path of destruction.
I take the Jefferson foundation over Wiki (which ANYONE - even you or I can edit and change ANY Wiki entry) any day.
Just as an FYI, Wikipedia also claims Castro only threw his lot with the Soviets due to America, when in reality, he actually was supporting the Soviets since before he entered Cuba, so Wikipedia isn’t exactly the most reliable source out there (and besides, it can be edited by anyone).
And quite frankly, I’d argue Jefferson was a LOT worse than MLK in various respects, not even taking account the whole Sally Hemmings bit (and just as an FYI, DNA testing confirmed that, at the very least, Sally was indeed impregnated by a Jefferson family member). For example, he was a fanatical cheerleader for the Jacobins during the French Revolution and Reign of Terror, and supported them and their wholesale massacre of Catholics and other Christians even when he should have known better especially when, unlike his fellow founding fathers who at least had the excuse of delays in information to and from Europe for not knowing the events, Jefferson actually saw them first-hand on-site. To put it another way, if MLK were merely a useful idiot to the Communists, Jefferson was an outright fellow traveler and a devoted communist. And don’t get me started on how Jefferson not only denied the divinity of Christ, he even went as far as to outright gut large portions of the bible to remove any divine elements to Christ and even to God, rewriting far more of the Bible than Martin Luther had ever done, and even sarcastically referred to the triune god as “a chimera.”
“I take the Jefferson foundation over Wiki”
You can get the same info from many other sources, the same this writer did.
Somebody lectured me about Jefferson’s supposed plagiarism and countenancing the Jacobins, completely ignoring that King did in fact plagiarize and hobnobbed with communists.
But all you people who take joy in slamming Jefferson have a presidential candidate who shares your predilections — Mayor Pete Butt. Maybe you can send him a donation.
Yeah, well, I suggest you take it up with Conservapedia regarding that.
And quite frankly, I’m pretty sure if MLK was truly a far-leftist, he would not have even met Nixon, let alone be friends with him, especially considering most far-leftists would have hated Nixon’s guts for his role in the McCarthy hearings as well as especially his exposure of Alger Hiss. And besides, why would he write that speech stating that Christianity and Communism were incompatible if he was a Communist. That would be a good way to net the Communists as an enemy since there’s no benefit to be gained for them. Even Vladimir Putin tried to claim that Christianity and Communism could be easily reconcilable, as did Pope Francis, and those guys actually MIGHT qualify as secret Communists.
As far as Barry Goldwater, eh, I really wouldn’t call that guy a conservative, especially not when he promoted gay marriage later in life, not to mention abortion and all of that stuff (and bear in mind, even Nixon was not fond of the promotion of homosexuality). He’s at most a libertarian. I will give him respect for being hawkish on defense, though.
“Jefferson was an outright fellow traveler and a devoted communist.”
I am glad you posted that. Stands as an revealing example of your rabid insanity.
I don’t support Pete Butt at all. In fact, quite frankly, I think he deserves to be shot for promoting Cultural Marxism, to say little about his being a homosexual, and a “married” one at that. So don’t claim that about me (and quite frankly, I if anything am more likely to support Donald Trump more than any of the Democrat candidates, let alone Pete Butt).
As far as Jefferson, I’m pretty sure that Richard Henry Lee accused him of being a plagiarist as even Mises institute made clear, and not only did Jefferson not deny it when accused, he even implied that was the Declaration of Independence’s strongest feature.
As far as the Jacobins and MLK, maybe I should remind you that unlike Jefferson who not only gave complete and full support to the Jacobins, but has also gone as far as to condemn anyone, even his closest friends such as William Short, for even daring to speak the truth about what’s happening in France, even condemned Washington as a “apostate of Liberty” when he refused to back them, MLK has also been friends with Nixon, who is a massive anti-Communist and responsible for Alger Hiss’s being condemned as a Communist, and aside from that, has also written a speech that explicitly states that Communism and Christianity can NEVER see eye to eye, not interact with each other, which means MLK at least knew Communism was NOT Christianity’s friend. That would all point to MLK NOT being a Communist and most likely against the ideology.
I am not slamming Jefferson. I celebrate his greatness, and I keep repeating that. I do not care about his moral failings. His other accomplishments stand on their own.
Communism and Mike King aka MLK,Jr. Cross-posting Mad-Max cause he laid it out so fine....
“Comey is a damned fool. If he had read all the King files, he would have kept his damned fool mouth shut, but being an narcistic egomaniac, he couldn’t resist putting his big foot in it.
This Willard Hotel sexcapade might only be the first revealed such event with Dr. King, and not just in this country.
If Garrow stops being a leftist fool and does apply his considerable skills as a historian to looking at the larger picture, he will know that he has to rewrite his book “The FBI and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr” because he left out so much about King’s associates, many of whom were either Communist Party USA members or supporters (at various times - ie. Wyatt T. Walker, Ralph D. Abernathy who later defected from the Soviet KGB front, the World Peace Council, Stoney Cook (limited contacts), Rev. Willie Barrows (hardcore red - Castro supporter), and Rev. Jesse Jackson.
King’s top advisors/aides were admitted CPUSA member and KGB asset, Stanley Levison (Sen. Committee (Church Com) hearings/files on FBI operations), and the other half of the KGB sandwich, Jack O’Dell, aka Jack Vesey, aka Hunter Pitts O’Dell (House Comm. on Un-American Activities, “Communist Infiltration and Activities in the South”, 85th Congress, 2nd Session, July 29, 30 and 31, 1958, including his testimony - took the 5th).
Jackson hired O’Dell after he was supposedly fired by King from his SCLC (Southern Christian Leadership Conference) for Operation Breadbasket, Op. PUSH and the Rainbow Coalition. O’Dell’s CPUSA and Soviet fronts record would be a book in its own right.
O’Dell was also Jackson’s key contact man with Papa Assad in Syria, Arafat (a KGB operative if you didn’t know already), behind the anti-Israel/pro-PLO Jackson platforms for the Democratic National Convention (and own presidential campaign plans for 1984 and 1988. One reason Jackson got his balls kicked in in 1988 was because one of the last true Roosevelt liberals put out the word that Jackson was a pawn for the Communists via O’Dell. Long story but maybe I can reveal it one day. I had a role in it.
Garrow started to expose the FBI’s top Kremlin penetration operation (Operation SOLO) in his books on the FBI and King, so the Bureau let former Naval Intelligence officer John Barron of the Readers Digest, release his long held book - Operation SOLO - about the FBI’s man in the Kremlin, Morris Childs, in 1995.
The operation was run by FBI Asst Dir for Counter-Intelligence Ray Wannall. I used to have lunch with both gentlemen and half the “spook” community from WW II and after (OSS, ONI, then the CIA, DIA, FBI etc).
Our guys knew what was going on and so did Hoover. McCarthy was a loose cannon but his information was accurate despite his nasty manner of running a congressional hearing. See the book “”Blacklisted by History”, M. Stanton Evans, on McCarthy. Stan was a friend and mentor, and published my second study on communism, the Senate being the first.
Talk about McDowell Luncheon Group/Accuracy in Media lunches. We had more prize winner writers in one room than most other places except the Press Club (that’s where I had lunch with some other Pulitzer Prize writers including Frank Kluckhon (sp), former Communist Party/then HCUA staffer Ben Mandel, a blessed memory, Latin American expert Daniel James (Guatemala), and others including Pulitzer winner Isaac Don Levine.
Today’s writers on the Left suck and always have. They were hacks back then and still are today, and some were just fools while others were traitors, but the NY Times and the Wash. Post kept publishing their trash as though is was the truth.
Today, with the new breed of journalists (Sullivan, Carter, Atkinson, Jarrett, DiGenova, Bongino, etc.), we are finally learning the truth about the Democrat corruption of the FBI, CIA, DNI and possibly the NSA. Their leaders range from incompetent to treasonous while the people I mentioned above (and didn’t mention such as my late father-in-law who helped stop any Soviet Bloc invasion of W. Germany, etc), are the real heros of America’s security.
One day all of this will come out IF the relevant documents are not DESTROYED at the National Archives. There is so much more to communist penetration of America than jut the civil rights movement, Hollywood, etc.
The media was right up there as a target and willing disinformation/smear partner against real patriots, and if the files on scores of US congressmen/women/Senators and some of their staff were to be totally declassified, you’d be lining up for the firing squads needed to clean out the treason that has existed so long, protected by the Democrats and Soviet operatives posing as Democrats (Conyers Jr., Crockett, Hayes, Dellums (a Castro/Maurice Bishop man), the Burtons, etc.
This King/FBI story’s new turn is only the first step in exposing what the Democrats fear the most, that the American people will find out that they have been America’s “ENEMIES WITHIN” since the 1930’s, protected by FDR (Lauchlin Curie, Harry Hopkins, Hiss, White, Coe, Remington and some you’d never suspect as traitors), even Truman to some degree, then by Carter, Clinton and perhaps one of the Soviet’s top penetration successes, Barack Hussein Obama and some of his top staff.
The truth is out there, if you are willing to work and look for it instead of taking in leftist media slop and calling it Beef bourguignon”.
Don’t HIJACK the thread to bash President Thomas Jefferson or put our fore-father in the same class with the charlatan Mike King, Jr.
Every time YOU try and hijack this thread to another topic to deflect from King’s sordid reputation, I will respond with documentation pertaining to King’s connections and activities. And none of it is purty; it just gets worse as the documents are analyzed.
MLK: Communist Revolutionary, Plagiarizer, Degenerate 1/15/2018 . Excerpted form the link below from The American Citadel
Martin Luther King, Jr. was a communist. You will never see that printed in an Establishment textbook, heralded in the controlled press, or mentioned in one of the numerous whitewashed MLK documentaries on the History Channel. Yet, despite officialdom’s deliberate cover-up of King’s communist activities and affiliations, the truth is that this so-called hero was actually a communist agent who worked to subvert our Republic.
King is today praised by many people as a literal prophet. He is seen as a visionary and a man of God. Even those who do not have any particular love for MLK consider him as a great social reformer – a man who fought for justice and opposed racism and discrimination. This deceptive image has been carefully crafted by the powers-that-be who are giddy that the American public has accepted King as a martyr. But just who was King, what type of person was he, and what did he really stand for?
Everything the public is told about this man is a false façade. Even King’s name is a forgery. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s real name was Michael King. His dad, a Baptist preacher, one day had an epiphany that he should call himself Martin Luther King. From that day onward he began addressing his son as Martin Luther King, Jr. Though not his birth name, it stuck – just like Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov’s criminal alias “Lenin” and Joseph Vissarionovich Djugashvili’s code name “Stalin” stuck. To call Michael King by the name of a true Christian reformer – the Martin Luther who sparked the Protestant Reformation – is a disgrace.
King’s appropriation did not end with his name, however. It is a fact quietly admitted by official sources that MLK plagiarized substantial portions of his university dissertations, his books, and his public speeches. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a prolific and habitual cheater and liar. He plagiarized, without attribution, the writings of other thinkers throughout his entire life. He was an intellectual fraud. [His first sermon at Ebenezer Church was plagiarized nearly in its entirety.]
The editors of The Papers of Martin Luther King, Jr. project have stated that King’s writings were “tragically flawed by numerous instances of plagiarism.” It has further been discovered that substantial portions of his doctoral dissertation were outright stolen, without any attribution, from other writers. In short, he did not earn his doctoral degree; he swindled it. He was not a legitimate scholar; he was a cheater and a thief. Martin Luther King, Jr. should henceforth never be referred to as a doctor or reverend. If justice were to be served, King would have his doctoral and theological degrees stripped from him for his prolific plagiarism and conscious cheating.
I repeat again the truth that Martin Luther King, Jr. was a communist. This fact was well known to the FBI at the time. J. Edgar Hoover, one of the greatest anti-communist crusaders in our history, conducted a special investigation of King. While most of the FBI’s documents related to King are sealed and hidden away from the public, some have recently been declassified. During the recent dump of files related to JFK, a March 12, 1968 FBI report regarding King’s behind-the-scenes dealings was released. I have read this 23-page document in its entirety and I suggest you do the same if you are interested in the truth.
The document discusses MLK’s communist handlers. That is, the men who directed King’s affairs, wrote his speeches, advised him, worked alongside him, etc. Almost to a man, these people were communist agents. Perhaps the most important was the Jew Stanley David Levison, who was described in the report as a “shrewd, dedicated communist,” King’s “Assistant Chief,” and as one of MLK’s “principal advisors.” Levison wrote many of King’s speeches, directed him in what to say during press conferences, and even personally wrote entire chapters of a book ostensibly written by King titled Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos or Community?
As an admitted communist, Levison was particularly monitored by the FBI. Consequently, the FBI learned many things about King through Levison’s communications with fellow communists. For instance, the report contains these intriguing lines:
“Stanley Levison has told Clarence Jones, another advisor to King, that under no circumstances should King be permitted to say anything without their approving it. Levison also informed Jones that King is such a slow thinker he is usually not prepared to make statements without help from someone.” Perhaps King resorted to plagiarism precisely because he was such a “slow thinker.” At any rate, King was not his own man – he was a puppet of his communist advisors. He was the front man for the Civil Rights movement – a movement that was without question a communist front from top to bottom.
The same FBI report contained this nugget of information:
“The reason King enjoyed this close relationship with communists is best explained by the fact that Levison, in February, 1962, passed the word to Gus Hall, General Secretary, CPUSA, “King is a whole-hearted Marxist who has studied it (Marxism), believes in it and agrees with it, but because of his being a minister of religion, does not dare espouse it publicly.”” King was a closet communist who deliberately betrayed the trust of his parishioners by pretending he was something he was not. He was a wolf in sheep’s clothing – a Marxist in priestly frocks. He was a reverend of revolution, not an advocate of peace.
King’s true colors were seen whenever he went anywhere to protest. His protests were not peaceful and “non-violent” – they were violent and disruptive, leaving chaos, hatred, and division in their wake. King often allied with openly revolutionary groups, knowing full well that they would provoke violence at his events. King himself was arrested numerous times. Among other things, he was arrested for interfering with police officers in the line of duty and for disobeying injunctions issued against him by the cities he held rallies in. Before his famous march in Washington, D.C., King told the press: “Jail will be the safest place in Washington this spring.”
King’s personal life was one of depravity and debauchery. He was a man of hedonistic excess. He lusted after alcohol and women and indulged himself with plenty of both. It is well-established that King frequently engaged in drunken sex orgies – especially on his road trips. The FBI report contained this account of an “urban leadership” conference hosted by King: “One Negro minister in attendance later expressed his disgust with the behind-the-scenes drinking, fornication, and homosexuality that went on at the conference. Several Negro and white prostitutes were brought in from the Miami area. An all-night sex orgy was held with these prostitutes and some of the delegates in attendance.
“One room had a large table in it which was filled with whiskey. The two Negro prostitutes were paid $50.00 to put on a sex show for the entertainment of guests. A variety of sex acts deviating from the normal were observed.”
These types of despicable orgies were quite normal for King and his entourage. In the report, we find this description of King’s lecherous behavior:
“As early as January, 1964, King engaged in another two-day, drunken sex orgy in Washington, D.C. Many of those present engaged in sexual acts, natural as well as unnatural, for the entertainment of onlookers.
When one of the females shied away from engaging in an unnatural act, King and other of the males present discussed how she was to be taught and initiated in this respect.
“Throughout the ensuing years and until this date King has continued to carry on his sexual aberrations secretly while holding himself out to public view as a moral leader of religious conviction.”
It was not enough that King himself was debauched; he felt the need to coerce women into lesbian acts for his own perverse entertainment. King was not a man of God, unless his god was the lord of the underworld, the instigator of sin, the Father of Lies. King was a hypocrite of the highest order – a charlatan who hoodwinked a nation with his flattering, but pitifully hollow, words.
Martin Luther King, Jr. famously said that we should judge a person by the “content of his character.” I fully agree. We should judge people by their character, not their skin color, race, gender, or any other factor. Actions really do speak louder than words. This is perhaps particularly true for individuals in the public eye who have bestowed upon them a great deal of trust.
If this principle of judging a man by his actions and character is true – as we all know it is – then what does it say about King? What was his true character? Was he the noble justice warrior and righteous reverend we have been told he was, or was he a charlatan, a hypocrite, a drunk, a cheat, and a subversive communist revolutionary? Is the image of King as a good person fighting for right authentic, or is it a methodically managed mirage? Is the portrait of a faith-filled minister preaching the gospel of love and fairness truthful, or is it more accurate to speak of King as an adulterous and deceptive Marxist preaching, through his actions, the gospel of division, discord, and social revolution? You can judge for yourself, but the record is crystal clear.
What hope is there for a world that brainwashes its children into idolizing a man as hypocritical and depraved as Martin Luther King, Jr.? What hope is there for America when she makes a holiday to memorialize a communist provocateur? What hope is there for the rising generation when they grow up believing that a violent, lewd, drunken, cheating communist like MLK “fought for right”?
The Lord Jesus Christ taught that “the truth shall make you free” (John 8:32). How free are you? Have you made the commitment to cling to truth no matter how unpopular or politically incorrect it is? Or do you go along with what the majority believes just so you don’t rock the boat? Are you a watchman on your tower proclaiming the truth unapologetically, or are you like the ostrich with his head buried in the sand? Are we, as a nation, in bondage to this false prophet, the communist martyr Martin Luther King, Jr., or are we honest enough to admit that we were hoodwinked by this carefully crafted communist deception?
The answer to this question is much bigger than Martin Luther King, Jr. – a man whose odious memory will eventually fade into oblivion. Whether we can recognize and admit that a man like King is a charlatan speaks to our level of spiritual discernment as a People. That the majority of people in this country have not yet realized the truth about MLK demonstrates how led by the nose we really are.
Perhaps people tire of me warning of the communist conspiracy, but only the grave will stop me from speaking out because I know the truth and therefore have an obligation to warn others. The fact is that communism has never been more powerful or pervasive than it is today, as the veritable worship of communist agent Martin Luther King, Jr. clearly shows. That little children in rural public schools in Idaho are raising their fists in solidarity with the communist world revolution is a bad omen and an indicator of terrible things to come unless we quickly inject them with a large dose of truth to counter the spread of the communist virus.
In closing, I urge you to accept the truth that Martin Luther King, Jr. was a communist. Embrace the truth that he was a total fraud, a supreme hypocrite, and a debauched sex fiend. Only truth can empower you, whereas clinging to the false façade foisted upon you by the controlled media keeps you in chains.
I have a dream that one day Americans will celebrate the memory of true heroes, honorable men, and authentic martyrs, while shunning the dark legacy of communists, degenerates, and traitors. I have a dream that one day communism, and the horrific pain, suffering, and confusion it causes, will be utterly extinguished from the globe. Perhaps it is only a dream – but it is one I am willing to die fighting for.
https://theamericancitadel.com/2018/01/15/mlk-communist-revolutionary-plagiarizer-degenerate/
I can count on one hand how many times I’ve been on Conservapedia, which is not terribly helpful. I’m not sure to which point you are specifically replying to.
I read your point before how you believe he was not a far-leftist, yet his associations claim otherwise. He absolutely believed that big government and a heavy federal hand was the “savior” for Black folks. He went on Merv Griffin’s show in the 1960s, where he was oddly “handled” by Harry Belafonte, who IS a strident Communist (unapologetic Castroite & Chavezite), and said (during the interview) that Communism was a legitimate political ideology/opposition to America (rather than denouncing it).
We all know that leftists have a nasty habit of lying about their intentions (no wonder they make such common cause with Mohammadans), so trying to figure out why MLK Jr. did this or that and how he couldn’t possibly really be one when he said this, it’s very easy to figure out. He wasn’t being entirely truthful.
You are correct that Goldwater was better labeled a Libertarian rather than a Conservative (unfortunately, his wives were involved with Planned Barrenhood, so he was quite militantly pro-abortion. That nearly cost him reelection in 1980 to a pro-life Democrat and he lied to supporters that he would tone down his stances on abortion, which sadly set the stage for his drifting evermore leftward on social issues and developing a pathological hatred for Reagan. Had he retired in 1980 as he should’ve, we’d have gotten an authentic Conservative Republican Senator that year instead of ending up with the treasonous Derp State trash McQueeg in 1986).
But, going by the Goldwater of 1964 instead of 1980-onwards, the country would’ve been better off with him as President from 1965-1973. We’d have been spared the budget-busting and Black family destroying “Great Society” horror, not to mention the incompetently managed Vietnam fiasco (he would’ve either fought to win or got out). That would’ve done far more for Blacks than anything LBJ did, who wanted nothing more than to use them for pawns and re-enslave them to the Democrats and (in his infamous words, “Have those niggers voting Democrat for the next 200 years.”) MLK Jr. couldn’t run fast enough to see LBJ get a full four year term in 1964.
Traitors,
Whores,
Attention whores,
Wannabe deities,
Useless idiots.
etc.
There is only one answer for them all.
Happy Memorial Day.
If you looked at the actual full statement, I said if MLK was merely a useful idiot (as in, interacted with communists without adhering to the ideology itself or even supporting it), Jefferson, by cheerleading for the Jacobins while being fully aware of what they are truly like from first hand witness, qualifies as a devoted communist (and as an FYI, the Jacobins ARE the inspiration for the communists as even Karl Marx stated).
Do you really want me to post sources about Jefferson supporting the Jacobins? Because I will.
*http://the-american-catholic.com/2012/06/27/jeffersons-jesus/
*http://the-american-catholic.com/2012/06/25/rewriting-jefferson/
*http://the-american-catholic.com/2012/04/11/fr-barron-eviscerates-dandy-andy/
*https://allthingsliberty.com/2017/05/understanding-thomas-jeffersons-reactions-rise-jacobins/
*https://distributistreview.com/liberty-god-that-failed/
*https://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/96oct/obrien/adam.htm
There’s a LOT of sources making this very clear, and that’s just a fraction.
And my point is that if you’re going to condemn MLK for being a useful idiot for the Communists (and let’s face it, that’s the MOST he can qualify as), you might as well condemn Richard Nixon as a closet Communist despite his exposing Alger Hiss simply because he allied with China during the Cold War as President, or how about Abraham Lincoln being a closet Marxist simply because Karl Marx wrote to him? Best be consistent, after all. And that’s all aside from Jefferson.
Thanks fieldmarshaldj.
Even a stealth Communist revolutionary would NOT try to claim Communism and Christianity would not intermingle and cannot do so, citing irreconcilable differences, however, which is exactly what MLK stated here: http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/can-a-christian-be-a-communist/. I know if I were a closet communist, I would not DARE try to claim that Communism and Christianity would not see eye to eye, precisely BECAUSE I’d realize that destroys any potential propaganda value by claiming otherwise. That’s why I am NOT calling him a Communist revolutionary, stealth or otherwise, any more than Abraham Lincoln might be one just for interacting with Karl Marx via letters, or Richard Nixon is one for aligning his country with Mao Zedong during the 1970s. At most, he’s a dupe, a useful idiot (if anything, I’d be more on the mark to say George Lucas is a closet communist). If anything, stealth Communist revolutionaries would try to paint Communism and Christianity as being one and the same without openly stating they adhere to Communism for obvious reasons. Just look at the guy who introduced Hillary Clinton to Saul Alinsky, for example, or Pope Francis, or the whole “Liberation Theology” thing, or Angela Merkel’s dad, who actually was one of the few German Christians to outright cross over to East Berlin when most were trying to flee to West Berlin. Heck, even Vladimir Putin, who at least tries to paint himself as distancing himself from Communism however thinly and poses as a Christian man, nonetheless had the audacity to claim that Vladimir Lenin’s relics and Communist statutes were comparable to Christian relics and the Ten Commandments. I’m pretty sure if MLK were a closet Communist, he would have been saying Christianity and Communism would work together. And I’m all too familiar with leftist lies, like how Che Guevara is painted as a hero and all of that, or how the only reason Castro became Communist was because of us mean Americans (when in reality, he was Communist long before we tried to stop him).
My point in even bringing up Thomas Jefferson at all was to show that there are plenty of individuals who committed similar bad things, on the topic of communism, and in the case of Jefferson, he actually COULD qualify as an open communist today just by his open and fanatical support for the Jacobins. I could have just as easily cited Abraham Lincoln as well since there was talk that he actually corresponded with Karl Marx and how his party actually backed Marx in his heyday, or heck, even Richard Nixon backing Communist China, and that guy was definitely anti-Communist. One thing I demand for when criticizing MLK is being consistent. I know if I were them and I wanted to bash MLK for ties to Communists, I would do the exact same thing with Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, even Richard Nixon (and I have complete respect towards the latter even WITH his unfortunate support Mao Zedong).
Besides, why on earth would MLK meet with Nixon at all, let alone give glowing praise for him, if he were a closet communist? Let’s not forget, Nixon is well known for his role in putting down that Communist traitor Alger Hiss during the McCarthy hearings, and most of the far left at the very least wanted to tarnish his reputation if not outright kill him for that. That’s even part of the reason why Watergate happened, as revenge for Alger Hiss? I’m pretty sure if MLK was far-left, he would have gone out of his way to condemn Nixon and even demand for his execution, like other far-left members who even had the audacity to claim that they’re patriots like Harry Truman, all while of course denying he was a Communist.
King’s close ties and support from Communists.
Your logic is grossly flawed and by omissions you fail to acknowledge King’s daily interactions with active Communists running his organization.
And why is he begging the state department to allow him to travel to Mother Russia in 1964? To spread the Gospel to Russian atheists and Orthodox Christians?... no. To spread the legs of Russian women? ... in his dreams. To connect with Communist leaders in a Communist country?... BINGO
King’s associations with communists, particular a few of his most prevalent speech writers would have likely placed him permanently on a prohibition list. >>>Stanley David Levinson which is why he was refused the Russian Visa.
The FBI file, titled “Martin Luther King, Jr. A Current Analysis” and dated March 12, 1968 was part of 553 files relating to the assassination of JFK, released by the US National Archives in 2017.
Under the heading “Strong Communist Influence,” the FBI report discussed how King’s “principal advisor” was a Jew named Stanley David Levison.
The FBI report said: Another complicating factor in the picture is the degree of communist influence on King. One of King’s principal advisors is Stanley David Levison. Ostensibly only a NYC attorney and businessman Levison is, in fact, a shrewd, dedicated communist. Levison has spent the major part of his life advancing communist interests.
He has actively involved himself in fund-raising drives for King, served as his legal counsel in certain-matters, suggested speech material for him, discussed with King demonstrations to be involved, guided him in regard to acceptance or rejection of various public appearances and speaking, and helped him with matters related to articles and books King has prepared.
Levison edited most of the chapters of King’s new ‘book entitled “Where Do We Go From Here; Chaos Or Community?” Levison wrote one chapter of this book and the publisher’s representative complained to King and Levison that it was obvious certain sections of the book were written by different, individuals.
Levison was the one who effectively controlled all of King’s public utterances.
Stanley Levison has told Clarence Jones, another advisor to King, that under no circumstances should King be permitted to say anything without their approving it. Levison also informed Jones that King is such a slow thinker he is usually not prepared to make statements without help from someone.
Under the heading “Subversives Attracted,” the FBI report provided further background to Levison, dealing with his formal position within the Communist Party, USA (CPUSA):
Stanley Levison was attracted to King and SCLC when King gained national attention. Levison soon developed a close relationship with King and was known in King’s group as “Assistant Chief.” In 1961, he was assistant treasurer of SCLC [Southern Christian Leadership Conference]. Prior to joining forces with King, Levison led a double like for the Communist Party, USA (CPUSA). Outwardly he was a successful businessman but he was also the clandestine fundraiser for the CPUSA. He was entrusted with raising and handling secret funds for the Party and used some of these funds to finance his own activities.
The reason King enjoyed this close relationship with communists is best explained by the fact that Levison, in February, 1962, passed the word to Gus Hall, General Secretary, CPUSA, “King is a whole-hearted Marxist who has studied it (Marxism), believes in it and agrees with it, but because of his being a minister of religion, does not dare to espouse it publicly.”
The FBI report then goes on to detail the full extent of the CPUSA’s involvement in the “Civil Rights” movement, and of how it was part of their plan to destroy America. In this regard, the FBI report shows that almost all of King’s advisors, speech writers, organizers, and personal assistants, were specifically recruited from within the ranks of the CPUSA, often by Levison himself.
The last section of the report deals entirely with King’s deviant sexual behavior which is just as bad as the earlier document dump in 2013 where he is yelling obscenities about fornicating for the Glory of God. ________________________________________________
So in the beginning, King plagiarized the bulk of his work: College papers, doctoral thesis, and his first speech at Ebenezer Church were not his material. Then he got involved with Levinson, his speech writer and the CPUSA became his guiding force and his $$$$$ source. And Levinson became the puppeteer behind the magical persona of King.
I was referring to the bit about MLK and his father regarding what I was replying to. I’ll even give you the link as well as quotes from the article:
https://www.conservapedia.com/Martin_Luther_King
“Vice President Richard Nixon invited King to Washington, D.C., for a meeting on 13 June 1957. This meeting, described by Bayard Rustin as a “summit conference,” marked national recognition of King’s role in the civil rights movement (Rustin, 13 June 1957). Seeking support for a voter registration initiative in the South, King appealed to Nixon to urge Republicans in Congress to pass the 1957 Civil Rights Act and to visit the South to express support for civil rights. Optimistic about Nixon’s commitment to improving race relations in the United States, King told Nixon, “How deeply grateful all people of goodwill are to you for your assiduous labor and dauntless courage in seeking to make the civil rights bill a reality.” “
“Political affiliation[edit]
Time and time again, liberals claim that MLK was a Democrat. Liberals point to the people he associated with or that he opposed Barry Goldwater as proof that MLK was a Democrat. There is considerable evidence that he was not a Democrat. Martin Luther King Sr. was a Republican, that would almost certainly make his son a Republican. Only after his son was arrested did King Sr. plead to President Kennedy for his safe release. It is noted at that point MLK Sr. switched parties to support Kennedy. This despite Kennedy voting against the 1957 Civil Rights Act and being initially opposed to the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King. The March on Washington was organized by A. Phillip Randolph, who was a black Republican. In addition, Robert Kennedy allowed the FBI to wiretap MLK Jr’s phone on a trial basis due to suspicion that Dr. King’s associates were Communist; this was later expanded during Lyndon B. Johnson’s presidency; which undermined King.[12][13]
It was the Republicans who led the way to free the slaves nearly one-hundred years earlier, that fact was not lost on his generation. Frances Rice, chairman of the National Black Republican Association said, [he] “absolutely was a Republican,” and “We were all Republicans in those days. The Democrats were training fire hoses on us, siccing dogs on us.”[14] In the 1960s, King would have witnessed the Democrat parties position on pro-segregation, against the Civil Rights Act. King was most likely aware of high-profile Democrats such as Al Gore Sr. and the Exalted Cyclops Robert Byrd voting against repealing segregation. Southern Democrats rallied around Jim Crow laws and Black Codes which were targeted against King’s message. Dixiecrats blocked the social and political progress of black Southerners for decades. Was King unaware? Doubtful. It was Republican President Eisenhower who began the push for integrating all white schools and the desegregation of the military. To think King was a witness to all the upheaval Democrats caused and then became a champion of Democrats is a stretch. “
As far as leftists tending to lie, yeah, I know that (like how Alger Hiss denied Communist ties through his teeth when in reality he was one, or how about Ho Chi Minh’s claiming he wasn’t communist when he really was one. Not to mention Edward Murrow and Walter Cronkite’s actions). But here’s the thing, the entire point of lying by the left is to complete an objective for them such as advancing their cause first and foremost. And the biggest way to lie and advance Communist goals, is to claim Communism is supported by Christianity, and are common allies. To outright deny that they can be allies, and even explicitly state that their atheism cannot allow them to find common ground, outright destroys the entire point of promoting Communism. If I were a Communist and I saw a plant trying to state that, I’d very likely have that plant executed ASAP precisely because he singlehandedly ruined any progress to the goal of establishing Communism, no value to gain from the lie, short or long term. That’s EXACTLY why I don’t buy the idea that he’s a communist, even if he is a leftist, and even if he’s a liar. Why would you lie about Communism and Christianity having irreconcilable differences and condemning Communism for its atheism? There’s nothing to gain for the Communists to do that. If anything, Vladimir Putin’s claim that Christian tenants and Vladmir Lenin’s relics are closely tied together comes far closer to actually advancing the Communist cause. And make no mistake, I’m all too familiar with leftist lies, like Sartre’s denials that freedom of speech was threatened in the USSR, or Alger Hiss’s denials of being a communist before a grand jury.
And I agree with you on Goldwater, he would have done far more for blacks than LBJ would have.
So why on earth did he write that essay denouncing Communism as irreconcilable to Christianity? If I were a Communist, open or stealth, not only would I not dare try to claim that due to it meaning I shoot myself in the foot, but I’d shoot anyone who dares claim that. You want an example of an actual communist infiltrator to Christianity? Try Vladimir Putin, Angela Merkel, the pastor who introduced Hillary Clinton to Saul Alinsky, or even Pope Francis. Those are guys who outright stated that Communism and Christianity are inseparable in a pack of lies. Also Liberation Theology as well.
Besides, he also met with Richard Nixon, who at the time was very anti-Communist, enough of one to partake in the McCarthy hearings against the Communists and even play an instrumental role in exposing Alger Hiss. I’m doubtful he would have sought his aid, and even speak glowing of him, if he were far left and an actual communist. I know the guys who did Watergate most certainly didn’t, they if anything tried to remove him from office on trumped up charges. Not to mention, even Nixon aligned himself against better judgment with Mao Zedong, who makes STALIN look like a piker, during Détente, should we list him as a closet Communist as well? Or how about Abraham Lincoln due to Horace Greenley being one of his closest Republican allies and his apparently getting correspondence from Karl Marx.
Great post
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.