From http://www.etherzone.com/2004/stang011604.shtml
|
"MARTIN LUTHER" KING, JR.
Let us now praise famous men – if we can. There are two reasons you don’t need to know anything about Mike (even his name is a fraud) King, to know that we should not be celebrating a holiday in his name. First, a respectable time needs to pass after a man dies, during which the facts will mature. After sober reflection has considered them, a national clamor will spontaneously call such an honor into being – it if is deserved. To force such a holiday into law soon after a man dies, almost gasping in haste as in an emergency, using intimidation and threats, is unseemly to say the least; but that is how the present farce we uncelebrate was arranged. Need we add that this principle applies to any man, whatever his name, whatever his color. The second reason proves ipso facto that the "Martin Luther" King holiday is a fraud. The only American who used to be so honored – the only one – was George Washington himself, the Father of our country, because sober reflection on the facts proved he deserved it. Since then, George Washington has been demoted. Look at your calendar. His birthday has been submerged in "Presidents Day," with the result that the only American honored with a holiday all his own is Mike King. Even if you knew nothing about him before you started reading this, the obvious question should erupt from your monitor: Does this man – does any American – deserve to be honored above Washington? Mike was said to be an apostle of Mohandas K. Gandhi's non-violence. Many Americans at the time wondered why it was that, wherever King went, violence erupted. He explained it himself, in a piece he wrote for Saturday Review (April 3, 1965), in which he set forth the four steps of his technique. "1. Nonviolent demonstrators go into the streets to exercise their constitutional rights. 2. Racists resist by unleashing violence against them. 3. Americans of conscience in the name of decency demand federal intervention and legislation. 4. The administration, under mass pressure, initiates measures of immediate intervention and remedial legislation." Remember, this is not something we are accusing him of. Mike King wrote this himself. Notice that step two of his formulation calls for violence. The reason violence broke out wherever he went was that violence was what he went into the streets to get. His lieutenants would do things in the target city deliberately designed to drive normal human beings berserk. What would you do if you looked out your bay window some glorious morning and saw someone peeing on your lawn? What would you do if you saw a couple there enjoying sex? What would you do if you were a mounted policeman and someone tried to disembowel your horse? The Communist Broadcasting System, etc., would not record this, but it would broadcast graphic coverage of what you did when you went crazy, with the logical result that fair-minded people around the country believed you attacked the "nonviolent demonstrators exercising their constitutional rights" for no reason. This was a typical King "nonviolent" demonstration. I participated in a modest effort to defuse some of this, as the only white member of a strike team that would travel to a targeted town and explain the scheme before Mike’s terrorists arrived to foment animosity. For instance, King chose Sandersville, Georgia as a target and Julia Brown and I went there to do what we could. Mrs. Brown had served as an F.B.I. undercover agent for many years in Cleveland. (This was the original, American F.B.I., not today’s terrorist gang that commits mass murder of Americans and has merged with the Soviet KGB.) Julia and I worked together many times. She would delight in telling people I was her grandson, which raised some eyebrows among people too polite to ask how a black lady could have a grandson as white as Herman Talmadge. When we arrived, Sandersville was simmering. King’s men had already provoked so much tension that it would have been dangerous to bring the black and white residents together to the same hall to hear us. So, we spoke to them on two consecutive evenings, one evening to the blacks, the other to the whites. We told them what this man King was, which organizations and people he worked with and fronted for, how he did it and what his purpose was. We explained that he was trying to divide the races and foment violence in behalf of his bosses who had more contempt for Negroes, as people of color then were known, than the worst racist concocted by the perfervid imagination of Harriet Beecher Stowe And, mirabile dictu, the tension dissipated. The people of Sandersville, Georgia, black and white, united in understanding who their true enemy was. King’s revolutionaries left. There was no riot. Later, Congressman Larry McDonald, the Georgia Democrat, invited Julia and me to testify against the proposed holiday for Mike. My beautiful "grandmother" and I flew together to the District of Criminals for the purpose. Julia testified that while she was a Party member, she "knew Martin Luther King to be closely connected with the Communist Party." Mrs. Brown became a one-woman truth squad. When word arrived about the next town King planned to terrorize, she would go there first and talk to the townspeople of both races who were willing to listen. Mike’s scheme would fizzle. So effective was she at exposing what Mike really was, so discredited and ineffective did he become, I worried that his Communist bosses might have him killed. As a martyr, he would be much more valuable to them than he had become. Wanting Mike to remain alive and ineffective, I warned my colleagues of my fear, hoping that sufficient publicity could neutralize the threat, but a few weeks later he was dead, killed by the usual "lone assassin." As usual, there was "no conspiracy." There never is. Waving a shirt he said was drenched with King’s blood (it wasn’t), Jesse Jackson, who said he cradled the dying King in his arms (he didn’t), launched a career selling "protection," that no doubt has turned Cosa Nostra black with envy. So, what was "Martin Luther" King, Jr.? Please look at the piece I did a year ago on the subject, which you will find in the archives of etherzone.com. He was a Communist. For proof of this, look, for just one example, at my book, It’s Very Simple: The True Story of Civil Rights (Boston, Western Island, 1965), which sold half a million copies. It’s Very Simple talks about Bayard Rustin, King’s sodomite "secretary," who spent his entire life in Communist Party activities, and who demanded that "more bloody Negro suffering should be encouraged so that squeamish Northern Negroes would be horrified into line. . . ." There was also a man named Hunter Pitts O’Dell, who ran King’s organization. O’Dell was a member of the national committee of the Communist Party. The media of the time kept exposing O’Dell and Mike kept pretending to fire him, but O’Dell later would turn up elsewhere in King’s apparatus. But the thing that has always amused me is that, after the book was published, we learned much more about King’s Communist and other activities than we knew before. I had to write many magazine articles to catch up. For instance, when I wrote It’s Very Simple I did not yet know about Stanley Levison. Suddenly, King started to make speeches about the war in Vietnam. Well meaning Americans scratched their heads. The war took him far afield from "civil rights," and his speeches sounded like enemy propaganda cooked up in Hanoi. The reason was that Stanley Levison was writing those speeches. So who was Stanley Levison? Stanley was the paymaster in this country for the KGB, the Soviet secret police. The KGB would send Stanley the rubles to pay for all Soviet activities in the United States, and he would distribute the money. How high up in the Soviet apparatus would you have to be – how much would the KGB have to trust you – to get that job? Stanley Levison, of the KGB, financed Mike King and wrote his speeches. I also did not yet know that "Dr." King was a consummate plagiarist, who stole enormous chunks of other people’s work. Anyone else doing that to such an extent would be summarily stripped of his doctorate, but "Dr." King is more than equal. (See George Orwell’s Animal Farm.) He also turns out to have been a world-class womanizer, maybe even surpassing his protector, Jack Kennedy. Remember that King was allegedly a preacher of the gospel. The giveaway to all this is that even King’s admirers – unable to staunch the extrusion of treason and filth – reluctantly admit it. See for instance the work of Professor David J. Garrow, certainly a sympathetic King scholar. This is the record of the man our Communist leaders in the District of Criminals have even elevated above Washington. I’ll be talking about King for the entire two hours on my radio show on
Monday. Compare what I tell you to what every other host on the radio says.
Simply go to my website, http://www.stangbooks.com/,
click on Network Talk Radio and click on Listen. I also have a few copies of the
first and second editions of the paperback It’s Very Simple available.
They are "new," but remember that they are almost 40 years old and somewhat
yellowed and faded. Call the North Hollywood American Opinion Bookstore, 800
470-8783. "Published originally at EtherZone.com : republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact." Alan Stang has been a network radio talk show host and was one of Mike
Wallace's first writers. He was a senior writer for American Opinion
magazine and has lectured around the world for more than 30 years. He is also
the author of ten books, including, most recently,
Perestroika Sunset, surrounding our Government's deception in
the POW/MIA arena. If you would like him to address your group, please email
what you have in mind. He is a regular columnist for Ether Zone.
We invite you to visit his website at: www.stangbooks.com Published in the January 16, 2004 issue of Ether Zone.
|