The Burning Platform

RSS

93 Comments

1. 

   eugend66 says:

   G Washington was a stateman, the dreamer shines GW`s boots when Satan is in a good mood.
   I say, let the sleeping dogs asleep. Enjoy the day off!

   Like or Dislike: 5  1

   21st January 2013 at 8:35 am

2. 

   Smokey says:

   MLK was a racist alley nigger. He was a whore monger who preached nonviolence while inciting violence everywhere he went. There is solid documentary evidence that he plagiarized his doctoral thesis. He lifted the goddamn thing word for word. What a fucking fraud. And people call that sawed off cricket “Doctor King”. Martin Luther King eats shit.

   Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 16  10

   21st January 2013 at 8:53 am

3. 

   ragman says:

   I call bullshit on this whole michael king dog-and-pony show. His record was so fucking bad that the Fibbies can never release his record.

   Like or Dislike: 2  1

   21st January 2013 at 8:59 am

4. 

   Administrator says:

   I knew I could count on Smokey to diplomatically begin the discussion of MLK.

   Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 13  0

   21st January 2013 at 9:07 am

5. 

   Whippet says:

   I look at the fruits of a man’s life, and the quality of a leader’s disciples, to get a true picture of the man himself.
   His fruits- a speech with more staying power than a Viagra overdose, and a black community in the worst shape it has EVER been in American history. When the blacks were slaves to Whitey, and given freedom, they cherished it and many went on despite enormous odds to live distinguished lives filled with happiness and success. King and his hordes re-enslaved them- to the Democrat Party, housing projects, food stamps, and affirmative action.
   His disciples- Jess-ah Jaackson, and Revind Al. Pathetic.
   One of the judgments of our current society will be on our infatuation with lies, er, political correctness. We would rather lie to ourselves than face the truth of our history. We would rather say, “Yes, the rectum is a sex organ” than condemn homosexuality. (Oops, that’s a tangent…)

   I personally am in favor of eliminating all holidays concerning political figures and notable Americans (and Columbus, what a crock that is!.) I’m also in favor of eliminating all real people from our coinage, like it used to be. Something happened when we took Lady Liberty off the money and replaced her with dead presidents.

   Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 12  0

   21st January 2013 at 9:39 am

6. 

   Sonic says:

   Smokey,

   Good to see you’re still a dumbass. Do you actually do anything, or do you just bitch all of the time? I love that someone so quick to criticize virtually every other conspiracy theory discussed here chokes on the cock of Dr. King. Seriously, you believe this one why? Oh yes, he’s black, of course he was a bastard. You really are a mental eunuch.

   Cordially,
   Sonic

   Hot debate. What do you think? 7  10

   21st January 2013 at 9:47 am

7. 

   KaD says:

   I consider myself fortunate to have know some notable black leaders as well as average people and welfare/disability recipients. Alot of these people could have worked; but some were so mentally ill I don’t think they knew what planet they were on. It amazes me that in the days of slavery the slaves would endeavor to learn to read, even though it was punishable by death at the time. They realized the importance of education and thought it was worth the ultimate risk. By comparison todays black subculture glorifies crimes, dropping out and pregnancy. Bill Cosby is one of the few black personalities who’s had the guts to call out this reversion; telling kids to stay in school and not get pregnant. And he’s taken alot of flack for it too, sadly.

   Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 12  0

   21st January 2013 at 11:57 am

8. 

   Smokey says:

   Sonic—-What are you doing here? Welcome back. I ran your nigger-loving ass off at least three months ago, and didn’t expect you to return. Nice that you could take a break from gobbling all that black dick, at least long enough to drop by here and say hi.
   Your wife swallowed a quart of my baby batter last night. She said you wouldn’t mind, because you had sworn completely off pussy, and from here on are sticking exclusively to that black meat you desperately crave. Well, get back to sucking your black boyfriends cocks now, lest they run a train on your whore wife.

   Cordially,
   Smokey

   Hot debate. What do you think? 10  9

   21st January 2013 at 12:41 pm

9. 

   SSS says:

   Whippet said, “I’m also in favor of eliminating all real people from our coinage, like it used to be. Something happened when we took Lady Liberty off the money and replaced her with dead presidents.”

   Not a bad idea. To those of us who are numimatists, the $20 gold coin designed by Augustus Saint Gaudens is almost universally acclaimed as the most beautiful coin ever made. Second place might go the Walking Liberty 50-cent piece. Also of interest is the Standing Liberty quarter. When first issued in 1916, one of Liberty’s breasts was uncovered. “Gasp” said a disapproving public. In 1917, both of Liberty’s breasts were discreetly clothed.

   Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 6  0

   21st January 2013 at 1:12 pm

10. 

    StuckInNJ says:

    No niggers allowed. Whites only.
    Seperate Nigger entrances.
    Niggers not allowed to vote.
    Niggers need not apply.
    Niggers not allowed in good schools.

    Oh yes, fighting against that injustice is very very evil. That stupid nigger MLK!!

    Hot debate. What do you think? 7  6

    21st January 2013 at 2:39 pm

11. 

    Kill Bill says:

    Hoover saw threats everywhere except for gay men in dresses.

    Like or Dislike: 2  0

    21st January 2013 at 2:59 pm

12. 

    LLPOH says:

    Whippet – you are just the opposite of Berrnanke, who wants to eliminate coinage from all real people.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 5  0

    21st January 2013 at 3:17 pm

13. 

    Whippet says:

    LLPOH- that’s the nicest thing any one has ever said to me (and quite clever as well). Big kiss from a little dog.

    SSS- I have a few one ounce silver rounds minted in the fashion of the 1916 Liberty quarter. Beautiful! You can find some on eBay. Paid a premium over spot for those…

    Like or Dislike: 3  0

    21st January 2013 at 3:28 pm

14. 

    Smokey says:

    Stuck—-”Niggers not allowed to vote.”—-LOL. Why don’t you get facts instead of buying into a goddamn myth perpetrated by liberal society to assuage their collective guilt?

    Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Passed on 02 / 26 / 1869.
    Ratified on 02 / 03 / 1870:

    “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color or previous servitude.”

    NINETY fucking years before the civil rights riots.
    Please tell me some more about how Blackie was fighting for the right to vote.

    Blacks were allowed in good schools in the sixties, just like blacks are allowed in good schools today. The only difference is that today it is much more common for less qualified blacks to take jobs over more qualified whites. That’s necessary to deal with that white guilt, but FAR MORE IMPORTANT, is to keep extorting money from productive society to subsidize crack houses, rap music, and 16 yr old unwed mothers. Got to keep them dependent so we’ll keep getting those liberal votes to stay in power.

    Affirmative action by definition is reverse discrimination. White society must pay for shit that happened 140 years ago.

    MLK = Black Jesus.

    Hot debate. What do you think? 7  6

    21st January 2013 at 3:48 pm

15. 

    StuckInNJ says:

    You obviously can not distinguish between what is written on a piece of paper and what is actually practiced.

    I’m surprised you didn’t quote the Declaration of Independence. After all, it says ” all men are created equal”. So there you have it … there is no discrimination!!! LMAO

    MLK’s words are well documented. Therefore, if you are up to it;
    1) — Find me just one instance where he advocated violence. Just one will do.

    2) — Find me just one instance where MLK wanted free shit for blacks. He didn’t want free shit … he wanted access to the SAME shit. Find me one instance where he advocated a Welfare lifestyle.

    Good luck. ZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    The Jesse Jackson’s and Sharptons and all their ilk did not carry MLK’s dream … they perverted MLK’s message.

    Hot debate. What do you think? 7  5

    21st January 2013 at 4:12 pm

16. 

    flash says:

    for my pal TTeez.

    Like or Dislike: 0  0

    21st January 2013 at 4:37 pm

17. 

    Smokey says:

    Stuck—-How many fucking times on this site do I have to repeat that MLK did NOT advocate violence? He didn’t advocate violence. He fucking INCITED it, damn near everywhere he went. That was his fucking modus operandi. Preach peace, harmony, and brotherhood but at the same time incite violence. He was responsible for dozens, maybe hundreds, of riots. He was a fucking racist to the core. Race defined his existence.

    He was a fraud. His own black supporters have acknowledged, once it was discovered after his death, that he plagiarized his doctoral thesis. That is NOT some conspiracy, as ASSHOLE Sonic wants to believe. It has been proven beyond all doubt. I’ve read passages from both documents. They are word for word.

    Regarding your goddamn asinine request of one instance where King wanted free shit for blacks. It is a matter of public record that King’s opposition to the Viet Nam war is that the money should have been spent on social programs for blacks. He was very candid and proud of his stance on that issue.

    Stuck—It is highly apparent that you have no fucking clue what the man was about or what he stood for. Because if you did, you would not make such stupid ass statements.

    Hot debate. What do you think? 7  4

    21st January 2013 at 4:38 pm

18. 

    flash says:

    Martin had a dream , but the CIA had an assassin . Assassin trumps dreamer every time.

    For my pal TTeez. I apologize in advance to all the rest.

    The CIA, the Pentagon, and the Murder of Martin Luther King
    James Douglass on yet another federal assassination.

    The Martin Luther King Conspiracy Exposed in Memphis

    by James Douglass
    Probe Magazine

    The following appeared in the May-June 2000 issue of Probe magazine, (Vol.7, No.4) and is mirrored from http://ctka.net/pr500-king.html with permission of the author. We are grateful for Jim Douglass’ “being there” and for his penetrating exploration and accounting of the 20th Century’s true “trial of the century.”

    According to a Memphis jury’s verdict on December 8, 1999, in the wrongful death lawsuit of the King family versus Loyd Jowers “and other unknown co-conspirators,” Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated by a conspiracy that included agencies of his own government. Almost 32 years after King’s murder at the Lorraine Motel in Memphis on April 4, 1968, a court extended the circle of responsibility for the assassination beyond the late scapegoat James Earl Ray to the United States government.

    I can hardly believe the fact that, apart from the courtroom participants, only Memphis TV reporter Wendell Stacy and I attended from beginning to end this historic three-and-one-half week trial. Because of journalistic neglect scarcely anyone else in this land of ours even knows what went on in it. After critical testimony was given in the trial’s second week before an almost empty gallery, Barbara Reis, U.S. correspondent for the Lisbon daily Publico who was there several days, turned to me and said, “Everything in the U.S. is the trial of the century. O.J. Simpson’s trial was the trial of the century. Clinton’s trial was the trial of the century. But this is the trial of the century, and who’s here?”

    What I experienced in that courtroom ranged from inspiration at the courage of the Kings, their lawyer-investigator William F. Pepper, and the witnesses, to amazement at the government’s carefully interwoven plot to kill Dr. King. The seriousness with which U.S. intelligence agencies planned the murder of Martin Luther King Jr. speaks eloquently of the threat Kingian nonviolence represented to the powers that be in the spring of 1968.

    In the complaint filed by the King family, “King versus Jowers and Other Unknown Co-Conspirators,” the only named defendant, Loyd Jowers, was never their primary concern. As soon became evident in court, the real defendants were the anonymous co-conspirators who stood in the shadows behind Jowers, the former owner of a Memphis bar and grill. The Kings and Pepper were in effect charging U.S. intelligence agencies – particularly the FBI and Army intelligence – with organizing, subcontracting, and covering up the assassination. Such a charge guarantees almost insuperable obstacles to its being argued in a court within the United States. Judicially it is an unwelcome beast.

    Many qualifiers have been attached to the verdict in the King case. It came not in criminal court but in civil court, where the standards of evidence are much lower than in criminal court. (For example, the plaintiffs used unsworn testimony made on audiotapes and videotapes.) Furthermore, the King family as plaintiffs and Jowers as defendant agreed ahead of time on much of the evidence.

    But these observations are not entirely to the point. Because of the government’s “sovereign immunity,” it is not possible to put a U.S. intelligence agency in the dock of a U.S. criminal court. Such a step would require authorization by the federal government, which is not likely to indict itself. Thanks to the conjunction of a civil court, an independent judge with a sense of history, and a courageous family and lawyer, a spiritual breakthrough to an unspeakable truth occurred in Memphis. It allowed at least a few people (and hopefully many more through them) to see the forces behind King’s martyrdom and to feel the responsibility we all share for it through our government. In the end, twelve jurors, six black and six white, said to everyone willing to hear: guilty as charged.

    We can also thank the unlikely figure of Loyd Jowers for providing a way into that truth.

    Loyd Jowers: When the frail, 73-year-old Jowers became ill after three days in court, Judge Swearengen excused him. Jowers did not testify and said through his attorney, Lewis Garrison, that he would plead the Fifth Amendment if subpoenaed. His discretion was too late. In 1993 against the advice of Garrison, Jowers had gone public. Prompted by William Pepper’s progress as James Earl Ray’s attorney in uncovering Jowers’s role in the assassination, Jowers told his story to Sam Donaldson on Prime Time Live. He said he had been asked to help in the murder of King and was told there would be a decoy (Ray) in the plot. He was also told that the police “wouldn’t be there that night.”

    In that interview, the transcript of which was read to the jury in the Memphis courtroom, Jowers said the man who asked him to help in the murder was a Mafia-connected produce dealer named Frank Liberto. Liberto, now deceased, had a courier deliver $100,000 for Jowers to hold at his restaurant, Jim’s Grill, the back door of which opened onto the dense bushes across from the Lorraine Motel. Jowers said he was visited the day before the murder by a man named Raul, who brought a rifle in a box.

    As Mike Vinson reported in the March-April Probe, other witnesses testified to their knowledge of Liberto’s involvement in King’s slaying. Store-owner John McFerren said he arrived around 5:15 pm, April 4, 1968, for a produce pick-up at Frank Liberto’s warehouse in Memphis. (King would be shot at 6:0l pm.) When he approached the warehouse office, McFerren overheard Liberto on the phone inside saying, “Shoot the son-of-a-bitch on the balcony.”

    Café-owner Lavada Addison, a friend of Liberto’s in the late 1970′s, testified that Liberto had told her he “had Martin Luther King killed.” Addison’s son, Nathan Whitlock, said when he learned of this conversation he asked Liberto point-blank if he had killed King.

    “[Liberto] said, ‘I didn’t kill the nigger but I had it done.’ I said, ‘What about that other son-of-a-bitch taking credit for it?’ He says, ‘Ahh, he wasn’t nothing but a troublemaker from Missouri. He was a front man . . . a setup man.’”

    The jury also heard a tape recording of a two-hour-long confession Jowers made at a fall 1998 meeting with Martin Luther King’s son Dexter and former UN Ambassador Andrew Young. On the tape Jowers says that meetings to plan the assassination occurred at Jim’s Grill. He said the planners included undercover Memphis Police Department officer Marrell McCollough (who now works for the Central Intelligence Agency, and who is referenced in the trial transcript as Merrell McCullough), MPD Lieutentant Earl Clark (who died in 1987), a third police officer, and two men Jowers did not know but thought were federal agents.

    Young, who witnessed the assassination, can be heard on the tape identifying McCollough as the man kneeling beside King’s body on the balcony in a famous photograph. According to witness Colby Vernon Smith, McCollough had infiltrated a Memphis community organizing group, the Invaders, which was working with the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. In his trial testimony Young said the MPD intelligence agent was “the guy who ran up [the balcony stairs] with us to see Martin.”

    Jowers says on the tape that right after the shot was fired he received a smoking rifle at the rear door of Jim’s Grill from Clark. He broke the rifle down into two pieces and wrapped it in a tablecloth. Raul picked it up the next day. Jowers said he didn’t actually see who fired the shot that killed King, but thought it was Clark, the MPD’s best marksman.

    Young testified that his impression from the 1998 meeting was that the aging, ailing Jowers “wanted to get right with God before he died, wanted to confess it and be free of it.” Jowers denied, however, that he knew the plot’s purpose was to kill King – a claim that seemed implausible to Dexter King and Young. Jowers has continued to fear jail, and he had directed Garrison to defend him on the grounds that he didn’t know the target of the plot was King. But his interview with Donaldson suggests he was not naïve on this point.

    Loyd Jowers’s story opened the door to testimony that explored the systemic nature of the murder in seven other basic areas:

    1.

    background to the assassination;
    2.

    local conspiracy;
    3.

    the crime scene;
    4.

    the rifle;
    5.

    Raul;
    6.

    broader conspiracy;
    7.

    cover-up.

    1. Background to the assassination

    James Lawson, King’s friend and an organizer with SCLC, testified that King’s stands on Vietnam and the Poor People’s Campaign had created enemies in Washington. He said King’s speech at New York’s Riverside Church on April 4, 1967, which condemned the Vietnam War and identified the U.S. government as “the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today,” provoked intense hostility in the White House and FBI.

    Hatred and fear of King deepened, Lawson said, in response to his plan to hold the Poor People’s Campaign in Washington, D.C. King wanted to shut down the nation’s capital in the spring of 1968 through massive civil disobedience until the government agreed to abolish poverty. King saw the Memphis sanitation workers’ strike as the beginning of a nonviolent revolution that would redistribute income.

    “I have no doubt,” Lawson said, “that the government viewed all this seriously enough to plan his assassination.”

    Coretta Scott King testified that her husband had to return to Memphis in early April 1968 because of a violent demonstration there for which he had been blamed. Moments after King arrived in Memphis to join the sanitation workers’ march there on March 28, 1968, the scene turned violent – subverted by government provocateurs, Lawson said. Thus King had to return to Memphis on April 3 and prepare for a truly nonviolent march, Mrs. King said, to prove SCLC could still carry out a nonviolent campaign in Washington.

    2. Local conspiracy

    On the night of April 3, 1968, Floyd E. Newsum, a black firefighter and civil rights activist, heard King’s “I’ve Been to the Mountain Top” speech at the Mason Temple in Memphis. On his return home, Newsum returned a phone call from his lieutenant and was told he had been temporarily transferred, effective April 4, from Fire Station 2, located across the street from the Lorraine Motel, to Fire Station 31. Newsum testified that he was not needed at the new station. However, he was needed at his old station because his departure left it “out of service unless somebody else was detailed to my company in my stead.” After making many queries, New

    The only other black firefighter at Fire Station 2, Norvell E. Wallace, testified that he, too, received orders from his superior officer on the night of April 3 for a temporary transfer to a fire station far removed from the Lorraine Motel. He was later told vaguely that he had been threatened.

    Wallace guessed it was because “I was putting out fires,” he told the jury with a smile. Asked if he ever received a satisfactory explanation for his transfer Wallace answered, “No. Never did. Not to this day.”

    In the March-April Probe, Mike Vinson described the similar removal of Ed Redditt, a black Memphis Police Department detective, from his Fire Station 2 surveillance post two hours before King’s murder.

    To understand the Redditt incident, it is important to note that it was Redditt himself who initiated his watch on Dr. King from the firehouse across the street. Redditt testified that when King’s party and the police accompanying them (including Detective Redditt) arrived from the airport at the Lorraine Motel on April 3, he “noticed something that was unusual.” When Inspector Don Smith, who was in charge of security, told Redditt he could leave, Redditt “noticed there was nobody else there. In the past when we were assigned to Dr. King [when Redditt had been part of a black security team for King], we stayed with him. I saw nobody with him. So I went across the street and asked the Fire Department could we come in and observe from the rear, which we did.” Given Redditt’s concerns for King’s safety, his particular watch on the Lorraine may not have fit into others’ plans.

    Redditt testified that late in the afternoon of April 4, MPD Intelligence Officer Eli Arkin came to Fire Station 2 to take him to Central Headquarters. There Police and Fire Director Frank Holloman (formerly an FBI agent for 25 years, seven of them as supervisor of J. Edgar Hoover’s office) ordered Redditt home, against his wishes and accompanied by Arkin. The reason Holloman gave Redditt for his removal from the King watch Redditt had initiated the day before was that his life had been threatened.

    In an interview after the trial, Redditt told me the story of how his 1978 testimony on this question before the House Select Committee on Assassinations was part of a heavily pressured cover-up. “It was a farce,” he said, “a total farce.”

    Redditt had been subpoenaed by the HSCA to testify, as he came to realize, not so much on his strange removal from Fire Station 2 as the fact that he had spoken about it openly to writers and researchers. The HSCA focused narrowly on the discrepancy between Redditt’s surveiling King (as he was doing) and acting as security (an impression Redditt had given writers interviewing him) in order to discredit the story of his removal. Redditt was first grilled by the committee for eight straight hours in a closed executive session. After a day of hostile questioning, Redditt finally said late in the afternoon, “I came here as a friend of the investigation, not as an enemy of the investigation. You don’t want to deal with the truth.” He told the committee angrily that if the secret purpose behind the King conspiracy was, like the JFK conspiracy, “to protect the country, just tell the American people! They’ll be happy! And quit fooling the folks and trying to pull the wool over their eyes.”

    When the closed hearing was over, Redditt received a warning call from a friend in the White House who said, “Man, your life isn’t worth a wooden nickel.”

    Redditt said his public testimony the next day “was a set-up”: “The bottom line on that one was that Senator Baker decided that I wouldn’t go into this open hearing without an attorney. When the lawyer and I arrived at the hearing, we were ushered right back out across town to the executive director in charge of the investigation. [We] looked through a book, to look at the questions and answers.”

    “So in essence what they were saying was: ‘This is what you’re going to answer to, and this is how you’re going to answer.’ It was all made up – all designed, questions and answers, what to say and what not to say. A total farce.”

    Former MPD Captain Jerry Williams followed Redditt to the witness stand. Williams had been responsible for forming a special security unit of black officers whenever King came to Memphis (the unit Redditt had served on earlier). Williams took pride in providing the best possible protection for Dr. King, which included, he said, advising him never to stay at the Lorraine “because we couldn’t furnish proper security there.” (“It was just an open view,” he explained to me later, “Anybody could . . . There was no protection at all. To me that was a set-up from the very beginning.”)

    For King’s April 3, 1968 arrival, however, Williams was for some reason not asked to form the special black bodyguard. He was told years later by his inspector (a man whom Jowers identified as a participant in the planning meetings at Jim’s Grill) that the change occurred because somebody in King’s entourage had asked specifically for no black security officers. Williams told the jury he was bothered by the omission “even to this day.”

    Leon Cohen, a retired New York City police officer, testified that in 1968 he had become friendly with the Lorraine Motel’s owner and manager, Walter Bailey (now deceased). On the morning after King’s murder, Cohen spoke with a visibly upset Bailey outside his office at the Lorraine. Bailey told Cohen about a strange request that had forced him to change King’s room to the location where he was shot.

    Bailey explained that the night before King’s arrival he had received a call “from a member of Dr. King’s group in Atlanta.” The caller (whom Bailey said he knew but referred to only by the pronoun “he”) wanted the motel owner to change King’s room. Bailey said he was adamantly opposed to moving King, as instructed, from an inner court room behind the motel office (which had better security) to an outside balcony room exposed to public view.

    “If they had listened to me,” Bailey said, “this wouldn’t have happened.”

    Philip Melanson, author of the Martin Luther King Assassination (1991), described his investigation into the April 4 pullback of four tactical police units that had been patrolling the immediate vicinity of the Lorraine Motel. Melanson asked MPD Inspector Sam Evans (now deceased), commander of the units, why they were pulled back the morning of April 4, in effect making an assassin’s escape much easier. Evans said he gave the order at the request of a local pastor connected with King’s party, Rev. Samuel Kyles. (Melanson wrote in his book that Kyles emphatically denied making any such request.) Melanson said the idea that MPD security would be determined at such a time by a local pastor’s request made no sense whatsoever.

    Olivia Catling lived a block away from the Lorraine on Mulberry Street. Catling had planned to walk down the street the evening of April 4 in the hope of catching a glimpse of King at the motel. She testified that when she heard the shot a little after six o’clock, she said, “Oh, my God, Dr. King is at that hotel!” She ran with her two children to the corner of Mulberry and Huling streets, just north of the Lorraine. She saw a man in a checkered shirt come running out of the alley beside a building across from the Lorraine. The man jumped into a green 1965 Chevrolet just as a police car drove up behind him. He gunned the Chevrolet around the corner and up Mulberry past Catling’s house moving her to exclaim, “It’s going to take us six months to pay for the rubber he’s burning up!!” The police, she said, ignored the man and blocked off a street, leaving his car free to go the opposite way.

    I visited Catling in her home, and she told me the man she had seen running was not James Earl Ray. “I will go into my grave saying that was not Ray, because the gentleman I saw was heavier than Ray.”

    “The police,” she told me, “asked not one neighbor [around the Lorraine], ‘What did you see?’ Thirty-one years went by. Nobody came and asked one question. I often thought about that. I even had nightmares over that, because they never said anything. How did they let him get away?”

    Catling also testified that from her vantage point on the corner of Mulberry and Huling she could see a fireman standing alone across from the motel when the police drove up. She heard him say to the police, “The shot came from that clump of bushes,” indicating the heavily overgrown brushy area facing the Lorraine and adjacent to Fire Station 2.

    3. The crime scene

    Earl Caldwell was a New York Times reporter in his room at the Lorraine Motel the evening of April 4. In videotaped testimony, Caldwell said he heard what he thought was a bomb blast at 6:00 p.m. When he ran to the door and looked out, he saw a man crouched in the heavy part of the bushes across the street. The man was looking over at the Lorraine’s balcony. Caldwell wrote an article about the figure in the bushes but was never questioned about what he had seen by any authorities.

    In a 1993 affidavit from former SCLC official James Orange that was read into the record, Orange said that on April 4, “James Bevel and I were driven around by Marrell McCollough, a person who at that time we knew to be a member of the Invaders, a local community organizing group, and who we subsequently learned was an undercover agent for the Memphis Police Department and who now works for the Central Intelligence Agency . . . [After the shot, when Orange saw Dr. King's leg dangling over the balcony], I looked back and saw the smoke. It couldn’t have been more than five to ten seconds. The smoke came out of the brush area on the opposite side of the street from the Lorraine Motel. I saw it rise up from the bushes over there. From that day to this time I have never had any doubt that the fatal shot, the bullet which ended Dr. King’s life, was fired by a sniper concealed in the brush area behind the derelict buildings.

    “I also remember then turning my attention back to the balcony and seeing Marrell McCollough up on the balcony kneeling over Dr. King, looking as though he was checking Dr. King for life signs.

    “I also noticed, quite early the next morning around 8 or 9 o’clock, that all of the bushes and brush on the hill were cut down and cleaned up. It was as though the entire area of the bushes from behind the rooming house had been cleared . . .

    “I will always remember the puff of white smoke and the cut brush and having never been given a satisfactory explanation.

    “When I tried to tell the police at the scene as best I saw they told me to be quiet and to get out of the way.

    “I was never interviewed or asked what I saw by any law enforcement authority in all of the time since 1968.”

    Also read into the record were depositions made by Solomon Jones to the FBI and to the Memphis police. Jones was King’s chauffeur in Memphis. The FBI document, dated April 13, 1968, says that after King was shot, when Jones looked across Mulberry Street into the brushy area, “he got a quick glimpse of a person with his back toward Mulberry Street. . . . This person was moving rather fast, and he recalls that he believed he was wearing some sort of light-colored jacket with some sort of a hood or parka.” In his 11:30 p.m., April 4, 1968 police interview, Jones provides the same basic information concerning a person leaving the brushy area hurriedly.

    Maynard Stiles, who in 1968 was a senior official in the Memphis Sanitation Department, confirmed in his testimony that the bushes near the rooming house were cut down. At about 7:00 a.m. on April 5, Stiles told the jury, he received a call from MPD Inspector Sam Evans “requesting assistance in clearing brush and debris from a vacant lot in the vicinity of the assassination.” Stiles called another superintendent of sanitation, who assembled a crew. “They went to that site, and under the direction of the police department, whoever was in charge there, proceeded with the clean-up in a slow, methodical, meticulous manner.” Stiles identified the site as an area overgrown with brush and bushes across from the Lorraine Motel.

    Within hours of King’s assassination, the crime scene that witnesses were identifying to the Memphis police as a cover for the shooter had been sanitized by orders of the police.

    4. The rifle

    Probe readers will again recall from Mike Vinson’s article three key witnesses in the Memphis trial who offered evidence counter to James Earl Ray’s rifle being the murder weapon:

    1.

    Judge Joe Brown;
    2.

    Judge Arthur Hanes Jr.;
    3.

    William Hamblin.

    1.

    Judge Joe Brown, who had presided over two years of hearings on the rifle, testified that “67% of the bullets from my tests did not match the Ray rifle.” He added that the unfired bullets found wrapped with it in a blanket were metallurgically different from the bullet taken from King’s body, and therefore were from a different lot of ammunition. And because the rifle’s scope had not been sited, Brown said, “this weapon literally could not have hit the broad side of a barn.” Holding up the 30.06 Remington 760 Gamemaster rifle, Judge Brown told the jury, “It is my opinion that this is not the murder weapon.”

    2.

    Circuit Court Judge Arthur Hanes Jr. of Birmingham, Alabama, had been Ray’s attorney in 1968. (On the eve of his trial, Ray replaced Hanes and his father, Arthur Hanes Sr., by Percy Foreman, a decision Ray told the Haneses one week later was the biggest mistake of his life.) Hanes testified that in the summer of 1968 he interviewed Guy Canipe, owner of the Canipe Amusement Company. Canipe was a witness to the dropping in his doorway of a bundle that held a trove of James Earl Ray memorabilia, including the rifle, unfired bullets, and a radio with Ray’s prison identification number on it. This dropped bundle, heaven (or otherwise) sent for the State’s case against Ray, can be accepted as credible evidence through a willing suspension of disbelief. As Judge Hanes summarized the State’s lone-assassin theory (with reference to an exhibit depicting the scene), “James Earl Ray had fired the shot from the bathroom on that second floor, come down that hallway into his room and carefully packed that box, tied it up, then had proceeded across the walkway the length of the building to the back where that stair from that door came up, had come down the stairs out the door, placed the Browning box containing the rifle and the radio there in the Canipe entryway.” Then Ray presumably got in his car seconds before the police’s arrival, driving from downtown Memphis to Atlanta unchallenged in his white Mustang.

    Concerning his interview with the witness who was the cornerstone of this theory, Judge Hanes told the jury that Guy Canipe (now deceased) provided “terrific evidence”: “He said that the package was dropped in his doorway by a man headed south down Main Street on foot, and that this happened at about ten minutes before the shot was fired [emphasis added].”

    Hanes thought Canipe’s witnessing the bundle-dropping ten minutes before the shot was very credible for another reason. It so happened (as confirmed by Philip Melanson’s research) that at 6:00 p.m. one of the MPD tactical units that had been withdrawn earlier by Inspector Evans, TACT 10, had returned briefly to the area with its 16 officers for a rest break at Fire Station 2. Thus, as Hanes testified, with the firehouse brimming with police, some already watching King across the street, “when they saw Dr. King go down, the fire house erupted like a beehive . . . In addition to the time involved [in Ray's presumed odyssey from the bathroom to the car], it was circumstantially almost impossible to believe that somebody had been able to throw that [rifle] down and leaave right in the face of that erupting fire station.”

    When I spoke with Judge Hanes after the trial about the startling evidence he had received from Canipe, he commented, “That’s what I’ve been saying for 30 years.”

    3.

    William Hamblin testified not about the rifle thrown down in the Canipe doorway but rather the smoking rifle Loyd Jowers said he received at his back door from Earl Clark right after the shooting. Hamblin recounted a story he was told many times by his friend James McCraw, who had died.

    James McCraw is already well-known to researchers as the taxi driver who arrived at the rooming house to pick up Charlie Stephens shortly before 6:00 p.m. on April 4. In a deposition read earlier to the jury, McCraw said he found Stephens in his room lying on his bed too drunk to get up, so McCraw turned out the light and left without him – minutes before Stephens, according to the State, identified Ray in profile passing down the hall from the bathroom. McCraw also said the bathroom door next to Stephen’s room was standing wide open, and there was no one in the bathroom – where again, according to the State, Ray was then balancing on the tub, about to squeeze the trigger.

    William Hamblin told the jury that he and fellow cab-driver McCraw were close friends for about 25 years. Hamblin said he probably heard McCraw tell the same rifle story 50 times, but only when McCraw had been drinking and had his defenses down.

    In that story, McCraw said that Loyd Jowers had given him the rifle right after the shooting. According to Hamblin, “Jowers told him to get the [rifle] and get it out of here now. [McCraw] said that he grabbed his beer and snatched it out. He had the rifle rolled up in an oil cloth, and he leapt out the door and did away with it.” McCraw told Hamblin he threw the rifle off a bridge into the Mississippi River.

    Hamblin said McCraw never revealed publicly what he knew of the rifle because, like Jowers, he was afraid of being indicted: “He really wanted to come out with it, but he was involved in it. And he couldn’t really tell the truth.”

    William Pepper accepted Hamblin’s testimony about McCraw’s disposal of the rifle over Jowers’s claim to Dexter King that he gave the rifle to Raul. Pepper said in his closing argument that the actual murder weapon had been lying “at the bottom of the Mississippi River for over thirty-one years.”

    5. Raul

    One of the most significant developments in the Memphis trial was the emergence of the mysterious Raul through the testimony of a series of witnesses.

    In a 1995 deposition by James Earl Ray that was read to the jury, Ray told of meeting Raul in Montreal in the summer of 1967, three months after Ray had escaped from a Missouri prison. According to Ray, Raul guided Ray’s movements, gave him money for the Mustang car and the rifle, and used both to set him up in Memphis.

    Andrew Young and Dexter King described their meeting with Jowers and Pepper at which Pepper had shown Jowers a spread of photographs, and Jowers picked out one as the person named Raul who brought him the rifle to hold at Jim’s Grill. Pepper displayed the same spread of photos in court, and Young and King pointed out the photo Jowers had identified as Raul. (Private investigator John Billings said in separate testimony that this picture was a passport photograph from 1961, when Raul had immigrated from Portugal to the U.S.)

    The additional witnesses who identified the photo as Raul’s included: British merchant seaman Sidney Carthew, who in a videotaped deposition from England said he had met Raul (who offered to sell him guns) and a man he thinks was Ray (who wanted to be smuggled onto his ship) in Montreal in the summer of 1967; Glenda and Roy Grabow, who recognized Raul as a gunrunner they knew in Houston in the ’60s and ’70s and who told Glenda in a rage that he had killed Martin Luther King; Royce Wilburn, Glenda’s brother, who also knew Raul in Houston; and British television producer Jack Saltman, who had obtained the passport photo and showed it to Ray in prison, who identified it as the photo of the person who had guided him.

    Saltman and Pepper, working on independent investigations, located Raul in 1995. He was living quietly with his family in the northeastern U.S. It was there in 1997 that journalist Barbara Reis of the Lisbon Publico, working on a story about Raul, spoke with a member of his family. Reis testified that she had spoken in Portuguese to a woman in Raul’s family who, after first denying any connection to Ray’s Raul, said “they” had visited them. “Who?” Reis asked. “The government,” said the woman. She said government agents had visited them three times over a three-year period. The government, she said, was watching over them and monitoring their phone calls. The woman took comfort and satisfaction in the fact that her family (so she believed) was being protected by the government.

    In his closing argument Pepper said of Raul: “Now, as I understand it, the defense had invited Raul to appear here. He is outside this jurisdiction, so a subpoena would be futile. But he was asked to appear here. In earlier proceedings there were attempts to depose him, and he resisted them. So he has not attempted to come forward at all and tell his side of the story or to defend himself.”

    6. A broader conspiracy

    Carthel Weeden, captain of Fire Station 2 in 1968, testified that he was on duty the morning of April 4 when two U.S. Army officers approached him. The officers said they wanted a lookout for the Lorraine Motel. Weeden said they carried briefcases and indicated they had cameras. Weeden showed the officers to the roof of the fire station. He left them at the edge of its northeast corner behind a parapet wall. From there the Army officers had a bird’s-eye view of Dr. King’s balcony doorway and could also look down on the brushy area adjacent to the fire station.

    The testimony of writer Douglas Valentine filled in the background of the men Carthel Weeden had taken up to the roof of Fire Station 2. While Valentine was researching his book The Phoenix Program (1990), on the CIA’s notorious counterintelligence program against Vietnamese villagers, he talked with veterans in military intelligence who had been re-deployed from the Vietnam War to the sixties antiwar movement. They told him that in 1968 the Army’s 111th Military Intelligence Group kept Martin Luther King under 24-hour-a-day surveillance. Its agents were in Memphis April 4. As Valentine wrote in The Phoenix Program, they “reportedly watched and took photos while King’s assassin moved into position, took aim, fired, and walked away.”

    Testimony which juror David Morphy later described as “awesome” was that of former CIA operative Jack Terrell, a whistle-blower in the Iran-Contra scandal. Terrell, who was dying of liver cancer in Florida, testified by videotape that his close friend J.D. Hill had confessed to him that he had been a member of an Army sniper team in Memphis assigned to shoot “an unknown target” on April 4. After training for a triangular shooting, the snipers were on their way into Memphis to take up positions in a watertower and two buildings when their mission was suddenly cancelled. Hill said he realized, when he learned of King’s assassination the next day, that the team must have been part of a contingency plan to kill King if another shooter failed.

    Terrell said J.D. Hill was shot to death. His wife was charged with shooting Hill (in response to his drinking), but she was not indicted. From the details of Hill’s death, Terrell thought the story about Hill’s wife shooting him was a cover, and that his friend had been assassinated. In an interview, Terrell said the CIA’s heavy censorship of his book Disposable Patriot (1992) included changing the paragraph on J.D. Hill’s death, so that it read as if Terrell thought Hill’s wife was responsible.

    7. Cover-up

    Walter Fauntroy, Dr. King’s colleague and a 20-year member of Congress, chaired the subcommittee of the 1976-78 House Select Committee on Assassinations that investigated King’s assassination. Fauntroy testified in Memphis that in the course of the HSCA investigation “it was apparent that we were dealing with very sophisticated forces.” He discovered electronic bugs on his phone and TV set. When Richard Sprague, HSCA’s first chief investigator, said he would make available all CIA, FBI, and military intelligence records, he became a focus of controversy. Sprague was forced to resign. His successor made no demands on U.S. intelligence agencies. Such pressures contributed to the subcommittee’s ending its investigation, as Fauntroy said, “without having thoroughly investigated all of the evidence that was apparent.” Its formal conclusion was that Ray assassinated King, that he probably had help, and that the government was not involved.

    When I interviewed Fauntroy in a van on his way back to the Memphis Airport, I asked about the implications of his statements in an April 4, 1997 Atlanta Constitution article. The article said Fauntroy now believed “Ray did not fire the shot that killed King and was part of a larger conspiracy that possibly involved federal law enforcement agencies, ” and added: “Fauntroy said he kept silent about his suspicions because of fear for himself and his family.”

    Fauntroy told me that when he left Congress in 1991 he had the opportunity to read through his files on the King assassination, including raw materials that he’d never seen before. Among them was information from J. Edgar Hoover’s logs. There he learned that in the three weeks before King’s murder the FBI chief held a series of meetings with “persons involved with the CIA and military intelligence in the Phoenix operation in Southeast Asia.” Why? Fauntroy also discovered there had been Green Berets and military intelligence agents in Memphis when King was killed. “What were they doing there?” he asked.

    When Fauntroy had talked about his decision to write a book about what he’d “uncovered since the assassination committee closed down,” he was promptly investigated and charged by the Justice Department with having violated his financial reports as a member of Congress. His lawyer told him that he could not understand why the Justice Department would bring up a charge on the technicality of one misdated check. Fauntroy said he interpreted the Justice Department’s action to mean: “Look, we’ll get you on something if you continue this way. . . . I just thought: I’ll tell them I won’t go and finish the book, because it’s surely not worth it.”

    At the conclusion of his trial testimony, Fauntroy also spoke about his fear of an FBI attempt to kill James Earl Ray when he escaped from Tennessee’s Brushy Mountain State Penitentiary in June 1977. Congressman Fauntroy had heard reports about an FBI SWAT team having been sent into the area around the prison to shoot Ray and prevent his testifying at the HSCA hearings. Fauntroy asked HSCA chair Louis Stokes to alert Tennesssee Governor Ray Blanton to the danger to the HSCA’s star witness and Blanton’s most famous prisoner. When Stokes did, Blanton called off the FBI SWAT team, Ray was caught safely by local authorities, and in Fauntroy’s words, “we all breathed a sigh of relief.”

    The Memphis jury also learned how a 1993-98 Tennessee State investigation into the King assassination was, if not a cover-up, then an inquiry noteworthy for its lack of witnesses. Lewis Garrison had subpoenaed the head of the investigation, Mark Glankler, in an effort to discover evidence helpful to Jowers’s defense. William Pepper then cross-examined Glankler on the witnesses he had interviewed in his investigation:

    Q. (BY MR. PEPPER) Mr. Glankler, did you interview Mr. Maynard Stiles, whose testifying –

    A. I know the name, Counselor, but I don’t think I took a statement from Maynard Stiles or interviewed him. I don’t think I did.

    Q. Did you ever interview Mr. Floyd Newsum?

    A. Can you help me with what he does?

    Q. Yes. He was a black fireman who was assigned to Station Number 2.

    A. I don’t recall the name, Counsel.

    Q. All right. Ever interview Mr. Norvell Wallace?

    A. I don’t recall that name offhand either.

    Q. Ever interview Captain Jerry Williams?

    A. Fireman also?

    Q. Jerry Williams was a policeman. He was a homicide detective.

    A. No, sir, I don’t – I really don’t recall that name.

    Q. Fair enough. Did you ever interview Mr. Charles Hurley, a private citizen?

    A. Does he have a wife named Peggy?

    Q. Yes.

    A. I think we did talk with a Peggy Hurley or attempted to.

    Q. Did you interview a Mr. Leon Cohen?

    A. I just don’t recall without –

    Q. Did you ever interview Mr. James McCraw?

    A. I believe we did. He talks with a device?

    Q. Yes, the voice box..

    A. Yes, okay. I believe we did talk to him, yes, sir.

    Q. How about Mrs. Olivia Catling, who has testified –

    A. I’m sorry, the last name again.

    Q. Catling, C A T L I N G.

    A. No, sir, that name doesn’t –

    Q. Did you ever interview Ambassador Andrew Young?

    A. No, sir.

    Q. You didn’t?

    A. No, sir, not that I recall.

    Q. Did you ever interview Judge Arthur Hanes?

    A. No, sir.

    So it goes – downhill. The above is Glankler’s high-water mark: He got two out of the first ten (if one counts Charles and Peggy Hurley as a yes). Pepper questioned Glankler about 25 key witnesses. The jury was familiar with all of them from prior testimony in the trial. Glankler could recall his office interviewing a total of three. At the twenty-fifth-named witness, Earl Caldwell, Pepper finally let Glankler go:

    Q. Did you ever interview a former New York Times journalist, a New York Daily News correspondent named Earl Caldwell?

    A. Earl Caldwell? Not that I recall.

    Q. You never interviewed him in the course of your investigation?

    A. I just don’t recall that name.

    MR. PEPPER: I have no further comments about this investigation – no further questions for this investigator.

    The vision behind the trial

    In his sprawling, brilliant work that underlies the trial, Orders to Kill (1995), William Pepper introduced readers to most of the 70 witnesses who took the stand in Memphis or were cited by deposition, tape, and other witnesses. To keep this article from reading like either an encyclopedia or a Dostoevsky novel, I have highlighted only a few. (Thanks to the King Center, the full trial trascript is available online.) What Pepper’s work has accomplished in print and in court can be measured by the intensity of the media attacks on him, shades of Jim Garrison. But even Garrison did not gain the support of the Kennedy family (in his case) or achieve a guilty verdict. The Memphis trial has opened wide a door to our assassination politics. Anyone who walks through it is faced by an either/or: to declare naked either the empire or oneself.

    The King family has chosen the former. The vision behind the trial is at least as much theirs as it is William Pepper’s, for ultimately it is the vision of Martin Luther King Jr. Coretta King explained to the jury her family’s purpose in pursuing the lawsuit against Jowers: “This is not about money. We’re concerned about the truth, having the truth come out in a court of law so that it can be documented for all. I’ve always felt that somehow the truth would be known, and I hoped that I would live to see it. It is important I think for the sake of healing so many people – my family, other people, the nation.”

    Dexter King, the plaintiffs’ final witness, said the trial was about why his father had been killed: “From a holistic side, in terms of the people, in terms of the masses, yes, it has to be dealt with because it is not about who killed Martin Luther King Jr., my father. It is not necessarily about all of those details. It is about: Why was he killed? Because if you answer the why, you will understand the same things are still happening. Until we address that, we’re all in trouble. Because if it could happen to him, if it can happen to this family, it can happen to anybody.

    “It is so amazing for me that as soon as this issue of potential involvement of the federal government came up, all of a sudden the media just went totally negative against the family. I couldn’t understand that. I kept asking my mother, ‘What is going on?’

    “She reminded me. She said, ‘Dexter, your dad and I have lived through this once already. You have to understand that when you take a stand against the establishment, first, you will be attacked. There is an attempt to discredit. Second, [an attempt] to try and character-assassinate. And third, ultimately physical termination or assassination.’

    “Now the truth of the matter is if my father had stopped and not spoken out, if he had just somehow compromised, he would probably still be here with us today. But the minute you start talking about redistribution of wealth and stopping a major conflict, which also has economic ramifications . . . ”

    In his closing argument, William Pepper identified economic power as the root reason for King’s assassination: “When Martin King opposed the war, when he rallied people to oppose the war, he was threatening the bottom lines of some of the largest defense contractors in this country. This was about money. He was threatening the weapons industry, the hardware, the armaments industries, that would all lose as a result of the end of the war.

    “The second aspect of his work that also dealt with money that caused a great deal of consternation in the circles of power in this land had to do with his commitment to take a massive group of people to Washington. . . . Now he began to talk about a redistribution of wealth, in this the wealthiest country in the world.”

    Pepper went a step beyond saying government agencies were responsible for the assassination. To whom in turn were those murderous agencies responsible? Not so much to government officials per se, Pepper asserted, as to the economic powerholders they represented who stood in the even deeper shadows behind the FBI, Army Intelligence, and their affiliates in covert action. By 1968, Pepper told the jury, “And today it is much worse in my view” – “the decision-making processes in the United States were the representatives, the footsoldiers of the very economic interests that were going to suffer as a result of these times of changes [being actived by King].”

    To say that U.S. government agencies killed Martin Luther King on the verge of the Poor People’s Campaign is a way into the deeper truth that the economic powers that be (which dictate the policies of those agencies) killed him. In the Memphis prelude to the Washington campaign, King posed a threat to those powers of a non-violent revolutionary force. Just how determined they were to stop him before he reached Washington was revealed in the trial by the size and complexity of the plot to kill him.

    Dexter King testified to the truth of his father’s death with transforming clarity: “If what you are saying goes against what certain people believe you should be saying, you will be dealt with – maybe not the way you are dealt with in China, which is overtly. But you will be dealt with covertly. The result is the same.

    “We are talking about a political assassination in modern-day times, a domestic political assassination. Of course, it is ironic, but I was watching a special on the CIA. They say, ‘Yes, we’ve participated in assassinations abroad but, no, we could never do anything like that domestically.’ Well, I don’t know. . . . Whether you call it CIA or some other innocuous acronym or agency, killing is killing.

    “The issue becomes: What do we do about this? Do we endorse a policy in this country, in this life, that says if we don’t agree with someone, the only means to deal with it is through elimination and termination? I think my father taught us the opposite, that you can overcome without violence.

    “We’re not in this to make heads roll. We’re in this to use the teachings that my father taught us in terms of nonviolent reconciliation. It works. We know that it works. So we’re not looking to put people in prison. What we’re looking to do is get the truth out so that this nation can learn and know officially. If the family of the victim, if we’re saying we’re willing to forgive and embark upon a process that allows for reconciliation, why can’t others?”

    When pressed by Pepper to name a specific amount of damages for the death of his father, Dexter King said, “One hundred dollars.”
    The Verdict

    The jury returned with a verdict after two and one-half hours. Judge James E. Swearengen of Shelby County Circuit Court, a gentle African-American man in his last few days before retirement, read the verdict aloud. The courtroom was now crowded with spectators, almost all black.

    “In answer to the question, ‘Did Loyd Jowers participate in a conspiracy to do harm to Dr. Martin Luther King?’ your answer is ‘Yes.’” The man on my left leaned forward and whispered softly, “Thank you, Jesus.”

    The judge continued: “Do you also find that others, including governmental agencies, were parties to this conspiracy as alleged by the defendant?’ Your answer to that one is also ‘Yes.’” An even more heartfelt whisper: “Thank you, Jesus!”

    David Morphy, the only juror to grant an interview, said later: “We can look back on it and say that we did change history. But that’s not why we did it. It was because there was an overwhelming amount of evidence and just too many odd coincidences.

    “Everything from the police department being pulled back, to the death threat on Redditt, to the two black firefighters being pulled off, to the military people going up on top of the fire station, even to them going back to that point and cutting down the trees. Who in their right mind would go and destroy a crime scene like that the morning after? It was just very, very odd.”

    I drove the few blocks to the house on Mulberry Street, one block north of the Lorraine Motel (now the National Civil Rights Museum). When I rapped loudly on Olivia Catling’s security door, she was several minutes in coming. She said she’d had the flu. I told her the jury’s verdict, and she smiled. “So I can sleep now. For years I could still hear that shot. After 31 years, my mind is at ease. So I can sleep now, knowing that some kind of peace has been brought to the King family. And that’s the best part about it.”

    Perhaps the lesson of the King assassination is that our government understands the power of nonviolence better than we do, or better than we want to. In the spring of 1968, when Martin King was marching (and Robert Kennedy was campaigning), King was determined that massive, nonviolent civil disobedience would end the domination of democracy by corporate and military power. The powers that be took Martin Luther King seriously. They dealt with him in Memphis.

    Thirty-two years after Memphis, we know that the government that now honors Dr. King with a national holiday also killed him. As will once again become evident when the Justice Department releases the findings of its “limited re-investigation” into King’s death, the government (as a footsoldier of corporate power) is continuing its cover-up – just as it continues to do in the closely related murders of John and Robert Kennedy and Malcolm X.

    The faithful in a nonviolent movement that hopes to change the distribution of wealth and power in the U.S.A. – as Dr. King’s vision, if made real, would have done in 1968 – should be willing to receive the same kind of reward that King did in Memphis. As each of our religious traditions has affirmed from the beginning, that recurring story of martyrdom (“witness”) is one of ultimate transformation and cosmic good news.

    This is reprinted with permission from the author. The original is from the Citizens for Truth About the Kennedy Assassination (formerly Probe Magazine).

    January 17, 2011

    James Douglass is the author of JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters.

    Copyright © 2000 Probe Magazine

    Hot debate. What do you think? 1  9

    21st January 2013 at 4:41 pm

19. 

    SSS says:

    KB said, “Hoover saw threats everywhere except for gay men in dresses.”

    Footnote. The FBI is part of the Department of Justice. Hoover’s boss was the Attorney General. True, the FBI tapped MLK’s phone. The wiretap was approved IN WRITING by Bobby Kennedy, who had gotten the green light from his brother.

    Trash

    Are you fucking insane? Not even RE posts shit that long.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 11  0

    21st January 2013 at 5:31 pm

20. 

    StuckInNJ says:

    I can’t believe I have to resort to Webster’s dictionary. The definition of incite is quite simple; “To provoke and urge on.” So let me ask again, cite me just once instance where MLK “provoked” or “urged on” violence.

    MLK did advocate Civil Disoberience …. like protest marches. In very many instances those peaceful marches were met by violent police thugs … the same type of police thugs we have today who will tazer a 73 year old woman. Blacks fought back. Violence ensued. I hardly think MLK was responsible for that.
    .
    .
    Would you agree that the Heritage Foundation is about as conservative a think tank as there is? They feel he stood for Conservative values. The point is you can quote blacks and a host of others who don’t like him …. a can quote a ton of references who like him. Such “arguments” prove nothing.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2006/01/martin-luther-kings-conservative-legacy
    .
    .
    You say I have no fucking clue what the man was about. Au contraire! You seem to think that if someone holds an opinion that differs from yours, then that means the other person doesn’t know shit. That is a fallacy.

    As a teenager I used to watch MLK’s speeches and marches on the news with rapt attention.

    Later in life I read very many of MLK’s sermons. Not only did I read them, I actually studied a couple of them. It was required reading in a course I took on Sermon Preparation. The man was a brilliant writer and communicator. That’s the truth.

    His sermon, “God is Able” is a masterpiece. He closed it with;

    “When our days become dreary with low hovering clouds and our nights become even darker than a thousand midnights, let us remember that there is a great benign Power in the universe whose name is God, and God is able to make a way out of no way, and transform dark yesterdays into bright tomorrows. This is our hope for becoming better people. This is our mandate for seeking to make a better world. Amen! ”

    That’s what I call Inspirational. Check it out here;
    http://www.godweb.org/godisable.htm

    Hot debate. What do you think? 5  3

    21st January 2013 at 5:34 pm

21. 

    Smokey says:

    Stuck—By your own admission, MLK organized protest marches, many of which you concede ended in violence. And you hardly think MLK was responsible ? JFC, who do you think was responsible? Mother Teresa ? I mean, if you organize protest marches and they end in violence, then you rinse and repeat over and over and over, how the fuck is that not “provoking ” or ” urging on “? I mean, it’s kind of obvious that after the first few times and it ends in violence, well, goddamn, guess what’s gonna keep happening? How the fuck is that not provoking?

    Certainly King was a great orator. I’ve never disputed that. So was Hitler. But the fact remains that King incited violence. To deny that is to be fucking blind. I mean, look at the historical record. If a man organizes protest marches, many of which end in violence, that is part and parcel the act of inciting.

    Do you honestly think I give a shit what some think tank in DC says? I can make up my own fucking mind. And while you were watching in rapt attention and stroking your cock as MLK decided which laws to follow and which to break, I was watching a fucking racist that made trouble throughout the land, and who incited violence damn near everywhere he went.
    Or are you still holding tight to your belief that he was protesting in order to get blacks the right to vote ?
    You talk with reverence at King’s “Sermon”. I’m not a religious guy. King purported to be–ie the Reverend ordination. But the record is very clear that King on multiple occasions committed adultery, while espousing Christian values. I’m not judging his sex life. He can fuck oxen for all I give a shit. But I AM saying that he was a huge hypocrite and on multiple occasions violated his alleged belief system / vows. He was as worthy of the title Reverend as Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton is. Or Jeremiah Wright, for that matter.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 8  2

    21st January 2013 at 6:04 pm

22. 

    Punk in Drublic says:

    “It was required reading in a course I took on Sermon Preparation.”

    Did you go to priest school?

    Like or Dislike: 2  0

    21st January 2013 at 6:04 pm

23. 

    Kill Bill says:

    Smokey, can you type more than one post w/o cock in it?

    Im starting to think your closet door ajar,

    Like or Dislike: 1  4

    21st January 2013 at 6:18 pm

24. 

    Kill Bill says:

    Hoover’s boss was the Attorney General -SSS

    Hoover also hated Bobby Kennedy and likely saw him as a threat to his job.

    Like or Dislike: 1  1

    21st January 2013 at 6:23 pm

25. 

    llpoh says:

    I am not a fan of MLK, and am troubled by the way he is deified. He was extremely flawed, as Smokey rightly (an colorfully) points out. My disillusionment really set in after attending a Jesse Jackson speech. I thought it would be educational. It was – but not is a good way. To say that Jackson is a man of peace is like saying a pit bull is safe around kids. Overtly they make him appear to be a leader of civil rights. In person it was more akin to watching the videos of Hitler stir the German people to war. He is no pacifist, and I now believe the same of MLK.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 9  1

    21st January 2013 at 6:35 pm

26. 

    llpoh says:

    Hoover was the first Dirty Harry – he hated everyone.

    Like or Dislike: 0  0

    21st January 2013 at 6:36 pm

27. 

    Sonic says:

    Smokey…ROFLMARBABBLJAO (rolling on the floor laughing my my ass raped by a big black lumberjack ass off)…you ran me off? Not likely. I’ve got productive work to do to support you while you suck on the nipple of your the bottle you bought with your kids food stamps. Go knock up another trailer ho and leave the real thinking to the few producers left in this country. Otherwise I might get bored and quit paying my taxes and play Black Ops while you starve to death.

    Why is it everytime you have nothing to say you manage to say it in a way that disgraces your entire genus (Dictyostelium)?

    Cordially,
    Sonic

    Hot debate. What do you think? 3  5

    21st January 2013 at 7:30 pm

28. 

    StuckInNJ says:

    KN — not priest school. Grand Rapids Baptist Seminary.

    llpoh — MLK to Jesse Jackson is like fire to ice. Jackson couldn’t hold MLK’s jock. Jackson, the ever present opportunist seized on MLK’s coattails and bastardized the message into something King would never recognize.

    Smokey — Pay close attention to the sequence;

    1. MLK explicitly tells the people to march peachfully.
    2. The people march peacefully.
    3. Police initiate violence.
    4. Blacks defend themselves.

    How convenient for you to skip from Step 2 to Step 4 …… and then question me to defend your own illogical logic.

    For the last fucking time, cite me just once instance where MLK “provoked” or “urged on” violence. You cannot, of course.

    I actually do not give a shit what you think about a Washington politcal group. That was not the point. Yet once again you competely and totally miss the point. It was YOU who brough up that certain black leaders turned on MLK. My point was … just like yours … do you think I give a shit about that?

    The world, church, society, etc has been full of hypocrites since day 1. Join the club. And then heed these words, “Let him who has no sin cast the first stone.”

    I am not trying to convince you to like MLK. I was only tring to give my perspective that he is not the “racist alley nigger” you claim. But since it appears your mind is closed tighter than a rusted steel trap, I guess we have nothing further to communicate.

    Hot debate. What do you think? 5  4

    21st January 2013 at 7:44 pm

29. 

    Administrator says:

    Loving Your Enemies
    November 17 1957

    “I want to use as a subject from which to preach this morning a very familiar subject, and it is familiar to you because I have preached from this subject twice before to my knowing in this pulpit. I try to make it a, something of a custom or tradition to preach from this passage of Scripture at least once a year, adding new insights that I develop along the way out of new experiences as I give these messages. Although the content is, the basic content is the same, new insights and new experiences naturally make for new illustrations.

    “So I want to turn your attention to this subject: “Loving Your Enemies.” It’s so basic to me because it is a part of my basic philosophical and theological orientation—the whole idea of love, the whole philosophy of love. In the fifth chapter of the gospel as recorded by Saint Matthew, we read these very arresting words flowing from the lips of our Lord and Master: “Ye have heard that it has been said, ‘Thou shall love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy.’ But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them that despitefully use you; that ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven.”

    “Over the centuries, many persons have argued that this is an extremely difficult command. Many would go so far as to say that it just isn’t possible to move out into the actual practice of this glorious command. But far from being an impractical idealist, Jesus has become the practical realist. The words of this text glitter in our eyes with a new urgency. Far from being the pious injunction of a utopian dreamer, this command is an absolute necessity for the survival of our civilization. Yes, it is love that will save our world and our civilization, love even for enemies.

    “Now let me hasten to say that Jesus was very serious when he gave this command; he wasn’t playing. He realized that it’s hard to love your enemies. He realized that it’s difficult to love those persons who seek to defeat you, those persons who say evil things about you. He realized that it was painfully hard, pressingly hard. But he wasn’t playing. We have the Christian and moral responsibility to seek to discover the meaning of these words, and to discover how we can live out this command, and why we should live by this command.

    “Now first let us deal with this question, which is the practical question: How do you go about loving your enemies? I think the first thing is this: In order to love your enemies, you must begin by analyzing self. And I’m sure that seems strange to you, that I start out telling you this morning that you love your enemies by beginning with a look at self. It seems to me that that is the first and foremost way to come to an adequate discovery to the how of this situation.

    “Now, I’m aware of the fact that some people will not like you, not because of something you have done to them, but they just won’t like you. But after looking at these things and admitting these things, we must face the fact that an individual might dislike us because of something that we’ve done deep down in the past, some personality attribute that we possess, something that we’ve done deep down in the past and we’ve forgotten about it; but it was that something that aroused the hate response within the individual. That is why I say, begin with yourself. There might be something within you that arouses the tragic hate response in the other individual.

    “This is true in our international struggle. Democracy is the greatest form of government to my mind that man has ever conceived, but the weakness is that we have never touched it. We must face the fact that the rhythmic beat of the deep rumblings of discontent from Asia and Africa is at bottom a revolt against the imperialism and colonialism perpetuated by Western civilization all these many years.

    “And this is what Jesus means when he said: “How is it that you can see the mote in your brother’s eye and not see the beam in your own eye?” And this is one of the tragedies of human nature. So we begin to love our enemies and love those persons that hate us whether in collective life or individual life by looking at ourselves.

    “A second thing that an individual must do in seeking to love his enemy is to discover the element of good in his enemy, and every time you begin to hate that person and think of hating that person, realize that there is some good there and look at those good points which will over-balance the bad points.

    “Somehow the “isness” of our present nature is out of harmony with the eternal “oughtness” that forever confronts us. And this simply means this: That within the best of us, there is some evil, and within the worst of us, there is some good. When we come to see this, we take a different attitude toward individuals. The person who hates you most has some good in him; even the nation that hates you most has some good in it; even the race that hates you most has some good in it. And when you come to the point that you look in the face of every man and see deep down within him what religion calls “the image of God,” you begin to love him in spite of. No matter what he does, you see God’s image there. There is an element of goodness that he can never slough off. Discover the element of good in your enemy. And as you seek to hate him, find the center of goodness and place your attention there and you will take a new attitude.

    “Another way that you love your enemy is this: When the opportunity presents itself for you to defeat your enemy, that is the time which you must not do it. There will come a time, in many instances, when the person who hates you most, the person who has misused you most, the person who has gossiped about you most, the person who has spread false rumors about you most, there will come a time when you will have an opportunity to defeat that person. It might be in terms of a recommendation for a job; it might be in terms of helping that person to make some move in life. That’s the time you must do it. That is the meaning of love. In the final analysis, love is not this sentimental something that we talk about. It’s not merely an emotional something. Love is creative, understanding goodwill for all men. It is the refusal to defeat any individual. When you rise to the level of love, of its great beauty and power, you seek only to defeat evil systems. Individuals who happen to be caught up in that system, you love, but you seek to defeat the system.

    “The Greek language, as I’ve said so often before, is very powerful at this point. It comes to our aid beautifully in giving us the real meaning and depth of the whole philosophy of love. And I think it is quite apropos at this point, for you see the Greek language has three words for love, interestingly enough. It talks about love as eros. That’s one word for love. Eros is a sort of, aesthetic love. Plato talks about it a great deal in his dialogues, a sort of yearning of the soul for the realm of the gods. And it’s come to us to be a sort of romantic love, though it’s a beautiful love. Everybody has experienced eros in all of its beauty when you find some individual that is attractive to you and that you pour out all of your like and your love on that individual. That is eros, you see, and it’s a powerful, beautiful love that is given to us through all of the beauty of literature; we read about it.

    “Then the Greek language talks about philia, and that’s another type of love that’s also beautiful. It is a sort of intimate affection between personal friends. And this is the type of love that you have for those persons that you’re friendly with, your intimate friends, or people that you call on the telephone and you go by to have dinner with, and your roommate in college and that type of thing. It’s a sort of reciprocal love. On this level, you like a person because that person likes you. You love on this level, because you are loved. You love on this level, because there’s something about the person you love that is likeable to you. This too is a beautiful love. You can communicate with a person; you have certain things in common; you like to do things together. This is philia.

    “The Greek language comes out with another word for love. It is the word agape. And agape is more than eros; agape is more than philia; agape is something of the understanding, creative, redemptive goodwill for all men. It is a love that seeks nothing in return. It is an overflowing love; it’s what theologians would call the love of God working in the lives of men. And when you rise to love on this level, you begin to love men, not because they are likeable, but because God loves them. You look at every man, and you love him because you know God loves him. And he might be the worst person you’ve ever seen.

    “And this is what Jesus means, I think, in this very passage when he says, “Love your enemy.” And it’s significant that he does not say, “Like your enemy.” Like is a sentimental something, an affectionate something. There are a lot of people that I find it difficult to like. I don’t like what they do to me. I don’t like what they say about me and other people. I don’t like their attitudes. I don’t like some of the things they’re doing. I don’t like them. But Jesus says love them. And love is greater than like. Love is understanding, redemptive goodwill for all men, so that you love everybody, because God loves them. You refuse to do anything that will defeat an individual, because you have agape in your soul. And here you come to the point that you love the individual who does the evil deed, while hating the deed that the person does. This is what Jesus means when he says, “Love your enemy.” This is the way to do it. When the opportunity presents itself when you can defeat your enemy, you must not do it.

    “Now for the few moments left, let us move from the practical how to the theoretical why. It’s not only necessary to know how to go about loving your enemies, but also to go down into the question of why we should love our enemies. I think the first reason that we should love our enemies, and I think this was at the very center of Jesus’ thinking, is this: that hate for hate only intensifies the existence of hate and evil in the universe. If I hit you and you hit me and I hit you back and you hit me back and go on, you see, that goes on ad infinitum. It just never ends. Somewhere somebody must have a little sense, and that’s the strong person. The strong person is the person who can cut off the chain of hate, the chain of evil. And that is the tragedy of hate – that it doesn’t cut it off. It only intensifies the existence of hate and evil in the universe. Somebody must have religion enough and morality enough to cut it off and inject within the very structure of the universe that strong and powerful element of love.

    “I think I mentioned before that sometime ago my brother and I were driving one evening to Chattanooga, Tennessee, from Atlanta. He was driving the car. And for some reason the drivers were very discourteous that night. They didn’t dim their lights; hardly any driver that passed by dimmed his lights. And I remember very vividly, my brother A. D. looked over and in a tone of anger said: “I know what I’m going to do. The next car that comes along here and refuses to dim the lights, I’m going to fail to dim mine and pour them on in all of their power.” And I looked at him right quick and said: “Oh no, don’t do that. There’d be too much light on this highway, and it will end up in mutual destruction for all. Somebody got to have some sense on this highway.”

    “Somebody must have sense enough to dim the lights, and that is the trouble, isn’t it? That as all of the civilizations of the world move up the highway of history, so many civilizations, having looked at other civilizations that refused to dim the lights, and they decided to refuse to dim theirs. And Toynbee tells that out of the twenty-two civilizations that have risen up, all but about seven have found themselves in the junk heap of destruction. It is because civilizations fail to have sense enough to dim the lights. And if somebody doesn’t have sense enough to turn on the dim and beautiful and powerful lights of love in this world, the whole of our civilization will be plunged into the abyss of destruction. And we will all end up destroyed because nobody had any sense on the highway of history.

    “Somewhere somebody must have some sense. Men must see that force begets force, hate begets hate, toughness begets toughness. And it is all a descending spiral, ultimately ending in destruction for all and everybody. Somebody must have sense enough and morality enough to cut off the chain of hate and the chain of evil in the universe. And you do that by love.

    “There’s another reason why you should love your enemies, and that is because hate distorts the personality of the hater. We usually think of what hate does for the individual hated or the individuals hated or the groups hated. But it is even more tragic, it is even more ruinous and injurious to the individual who hates. You just begin hating somebody, and you will begin to do irrational things. You can’t see straight when you hate. You can’t walk straight when you hate. You can’t stand upright. Your vision is distorted. There is nothing more tragic than to see an individual whose heart is filled with hate. He comes to the point that he becomes a pathological case. For the person who hates, you can stand up and see a person and that person can be beautiful, and you will call them ugly. For the person who hates, the beautiful becomes ugly and the ugly becomes beautiful. For the person who hates, the good becomes bad and the bad becomes good. For the person who hates, the true becomes false and the false becomes true. That’s what hate does. You can’t see right. The symbol of objectivity is lost. Hate destroys the very structure of the personality of the hater.

    “The way to be integrated with yourself is be sure that you meet every situation of life with an abounding love. Never hate, because it ends up in tragic, neurotic responses. Psychologists and psychiatrists are telling us today that the more we hate, the more we develop guilt feelings and we begin to subconsciously repress or consciously suppress certain emotions, and they all stack up in our subconscious selves and make for tragic, neurotic responses. And may this not be the neuroses of many individuals as they confront life that that is an element of hate there. And modern psychology is calling on us now to love. But long before modern psychology came into being, the world’s greatest psychologist who walked around the hills of Galilee told us to love. He looked at men and said: “Love your enemies; don’t hate anybody.” It’s not enough for us to hate your friends because—to to love your friends—because when you start hating anybody, it destroys the very center of your creative response to life and the universe; so love everybody. Hate at any point is a cancer that gnaws away at the very vital center of your life and your existence. It is like eroding acid that eats away the best and the objective center of your life. So Jesus says love, because hate destroys the hater as well as the hated.

    “Now there is a final reason I think that Jesus says, “Love your enemies.” It is this: that love has within it a redemptive power. And there is a power there that eventually transforms individuals. That’s why Jesus says, “Love your enemies.” Because if you hate your enemies, you have no way to redeem and to transform your enemies. But if you love your enemies, you will discover that at the very root of love is the power of redemption. You just keep loving people and keep loving them, even though they’re mistreating you. Here’s the person who is a neighbor, and this person is doing something wrong to you and all of that. Just keep being friendly to that person. Keep loving them. Don’t do anything to embarrass them. Just keep loving them, and they can’t stand it too long. Oh, they react in many ways in the beginning. They react with bitterness because they’re mad because you love them like that. They react with guilt feelings, and sometimes they’ll hate you a little more at that transition period, but just keep loving them. And by the power of your love they will break down under the load. That’s love, you see. It is redemptive, and this is why Jesus says love. There’s something about love that builds up and is creative. There is something about hate that tears down and is destructive. So love your enemies.

    “There is a power in love that our world has not discovered yet. Jesus discovered it centuries ago. Mahatma Gandhi of India discovered it a few years ago, but most men and most women never discover it. For they believe in hitting for hitting; they believe in an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth; they believe in hating for hating; but Jesus comes to us and says, “This isn’t the way.”

    “As we look out across the years and across the generations, let us develop and move right here. We must discover the power of love, the power, the redemptive power of love. And when we discover that we will be able to make of this old world a new world. We will be able to make men better. Love is the only way. Jesus discovered that.

    “And our civilization must discover that. Individuals must discover that as they deal with other individuals. There is a little tree planted on a little hill and on that tree hangs the most influential character that ever came in this world. But never feel that that tree is a meaningless drama that took place on the stages of history. Oh no, it is a telescope through which we look out into the long vista of eternity, and see the love of God breaking forth into time. It is an eternal reminder to a power-drunk generation that love is the only way. It is an eternal reminder to a generation depending on nuclear and atomic energy, a generation depending on physical violence, that love is the only creative, redemptive, transforming power in the universe.

    “So this morning, as I look into your eyes, and into the eyes of all of my brothers in Alabama and all over America and over the world, I say to you, “I love you. I would rather die than hate you.” And I’m foolish enough to believe that through the power of this love somewhere, men of the most recalcitrant bent will be transformed. And then we will be in God’s kingdom.”

    Like or Dislike: 1  0

    21st January 2013 at 7:55 pm

30. 

    Smokey says:

    Stuck—I have cited chapter and verse of MLK provoking violence. That you refuse to see it is your shortcoming, not mine. Why is it that your sequence has the police initiating the violence? Were you there? You think that the protesters were innocent bystanders ? You must. Because you have YET to allow that they were in any way responsible for the strife and hundreds of riots in the sixties. King was the leader of that revolt.
    Stuck, here’s the thing. You have been duped. MLK is not a saint now and never has been. History has been rewritten by PC politicians who are consumed with guilt over slavery that took place over 200 years ago. Shallow, impressionable fools like you and Sonic swallow the new, politically correct version whole.
    There have been many fine black people throughout this country’s history. MLK was not one of them. King was a fucking hypocritical, racist, whore-mongering, violence inciting alley nigger not worthy of a cracked bottle of piss, much less a national holiday in his honor.

    Hot debate. What do you think? 7  5

    21st January 2013 at 8:11 pm

31. 

    llpoh says:

    I have done a quick review of MLK on the web. It seems very well established that he was a serial womanizer (not very attractive for a man of the cloth), and plagiarized material almost his entire life. Basically, the best I can tell, the reason that he wasn’t rebuked more for it, and didn’t have his doctoral degree yanked (as would have happened if he were white), goes something like this, “Well, he cheated, dat’s for sure, and it was wrong, dat’s for sure too, but da ting is, he be black, and dat’s what dem black folks does, so weez gonna let it slide”.

    He cheated on everything. One source tried to pass it off by saying that, well, he cheated from an early age, and kept cheating, and well, it just got so that he couldn’t stop, so you need to cut him some slack. Seriously.

    It is sacrilege to taint the memory of MLK. He did some good, perhaps brave, things. But he was a seriously flawed human being. Sort of a black JFK. Except he didn’t steal a presidential election.

    Hot debate. What do you think? 6  3

    21st January 2013 at 8:42 pm

32. 

    Smokey says:

    llpoh—Agreed.
    Personally, I wouldn’t have a problem with a national holiday for Colin Powell, after he dies. I don’t think he deserves one, but at least he’s not a fraud or a piece of shit. Besides, I like Powell. He rose through the ranks because of affirmative action, but he is a good and honorable person. He voted for Barack for President, but had I voted, I may have done the same, given the piece of shit Obama was running against. In my opinion, leadership and personal responsibility are character traits of Powell. Powell and MLK are polar opposites. One is a fine man of integrity and the other was a fraudulent trouble maker whose history has been rewritten by PC politicians.

    Hot debate. What do you think? 8  4

    21st January 2013 at 8:56 pm

33. 

    llpoh says:

    I like Powell. What I most liked was the way he looked like he had a mouthful of shit every time he looked at Bush during the last months of his tenure as SoS. Classic disgust.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 7  1

    21st January 2013 at 9:04 pm

34. 

    Smokey says:

    I have long suspected that Bush fucked Powell over. Can’t prove it and don’t have the details. Just an impression I’ve had for a few years.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 9  1

    21st January 2013 at 9:11 pm

35. 

    Administrator says:

    Smokey

    Your boy Cheney fucked Powell by sending him in front of the world with false data about WMD.

    Powell is a good man. I wish he would run for President, but his wife won’t let him. I don’t blame her.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 9  1

    21st January 2013 at 9:36 pm

36. 

    Smokey says:

    It surprised me the vitriol that the media went after Powell with when the WMD info turned out to be bad. I never would have thought they’d go after Powell like that. I’d have bet anything they would have cut him a break. I’d have lost that bet.
    And Powell lost a LOT of credibility over that. The fucking shame is that he was nothing but a pawn, and in my opinion did not deserve to be ostracized like he was because of the mistake.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 10  2

    21st January 2013 at 9:44 pm

37. 

    Administrator says:

    Powell was a good soldier to the end. He has bad mouthed no one since he left office. I respect him. He was misled by Cheney, Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld.

    If you read Schwarzkopf’s book, Powell comes across really well. Cheney comes across as a dickhead. If it was left up to Cheney we would have lost thousands of soldiers in the 1st Gulf War.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 7  1

    21st January 2013 at 9:49 pm

38. 

    Kill Bill says:

    Powell should have never listened to neo-cons. They always lie.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 8  1

    21st January 2013 at 10:04 pm

39. 

    Smokey says:

    I didn’t read Schwarzkopf’s book, but I do remember very vividly an interview conducted with him a few days after the 1st Gulf War. He said that in his opinion it was a mistake to march to Baghdad and then turn around and leave. The interviewer asked him to explain. Schwarzkopf said he thought the US should have gone into Baghdad and taken out Hussein. When the interviewer asked him why he didn’t, Schwarzkopf said he was a soldier and served the Commander In Chief and abided by the decisions made by the Commander In Chief (George H W Bush ).

    Hot debate. What do you think? 6  2

    21st January 2013 at 10:10 pm

40. 

    Kill Bill says:

    The neo-cons were beside themselves when GHWB took Scowcrofts advice instead of theirs.

    GHWB:
    “Trying to eliminate Saddam .. would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible … We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq …there was no viable “exit strategy” we could see, violating another of our principles. Furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-Cold War world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations’ mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression that we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land.”

    Like or Dislike: 1  1

    21st January 2013 at 10:17 pm

41. 

    Smokey says:

    Administrator—-If the 2012 election came down to Barack / Biden versus Ron Paul / Dick Cheney, would you support the Paul ticket ?

    Like or Dislike: 1  2

    21st January 2013 at 10:19 pm

42. 

    Kill Bill says:

    GWB listened to neo-cons and guess what?

    After eight years we are still in Iraq.

    The oil, like Wolfowitz said, didnt pay for the war,

    The war, neo-cons lied, would last six months.

    Eight years later we are still in Iraq.

    Neo-cons are liars.

    Like or Dislike: 5  1

    21st January 2013 at 10:21 pm

43. 

    Kill Bill says:

    The bulk of the funds for Iraq’s reconstruction will come from Iraqis — from oil revenues, -Donald Rumsfeld

    See, the war wasnt about oil, it was about oil paying for war.

    Oh, wait. Isnt that the same thing?

    Like or Dislike: 2  1

    21st January 2013 at 10:27 pm

44. 

    Kill Bill says:

    KB aims. KB shoots. KB scores.

    Like or Dislike: 1  2

    21st January 2013 at 10:28 pm

45. 

    llpoh says:

    Smokey – let us consider a three way presidential race: 1) Ron Paul/Sarah Palin, 2) Ron Paul/Paul Krugman, 3) Ron Paul/ Bozo the Clown (but then I repeat myself). Who does the Admin vote for and why?

    Like or Dislike: 3  0

    21st January 2013 at 10:30 pm

46. 

    Smokey says:

    Kill Bill—You frequently post comments to yourself, as the one above. Do you think that your affliction could be treated successfully with therapy ?

    Like or Dislike: 2  1

    21st January 2013 at 10:30 pm

47. 

    Kill Bill says:

    No Just because you think I am posting to myself doesnt make it so.

    Thats called false projection.

    Do you think therapy would stop you from painting people into your afflicted imagination Smokey?

    Like or Dislike: 1  2

    21st January 2013 at 10:32 pm

48. 

    THC4SSS says:

    Maybe Smokey could post a few links to some information on MLK. That way we could determine ourselves what to believe. I got a feeling his sources are at the bottom of the dumpster, but I am curious as I always thought he was a good person who stood for good.

    Hot debate. What do you think? 3  7

    21st January 2013 at 10:35 pm

49. 

    Kill Bill says:

    Why not stop skipping over what Rumsfeld said and admit war was for oil instead of pinning your fevered delusional imagination on me?

    Cause you cant disprove what Rumsfeld said.

    I just kicked your diapered ass to the curb.

    Thanks for playing Smokey,

    Like or Dislike: 1  1

    21st January 2013 at 10:35 pm

50. 

    Kill Bill says:

    Smokey doesnt post links to bolster his arguments he just reiterates his opinion over and over and over and claims he kicked ass.

    Like or Dislike: 1  1

    21st January 2013 at 10:37 pm

51. 

    Smokey says:

    llpoh—Don’t know. It doesn’t look like we’ll find out tonight because I believe he has already crashed.

    Like or Dislike: 1  2

    21st January 2013 at 10:41 pm

52. 

    Smokey says:

    I don’t need links to bolster my arguments. My arguments stand on their own. Only pussies like you, with vacuous arguments, desperately grasp at arguments from any fool that has been posted online.

    Like or Dislike: 4  2

    21st January 2013 at 10:43 pm

53. 

    Buckhed says:

    KB…I’m more inclined to believe that war with Irag was over the continued survival of the dollar as the world currency. We couldn’t have OPEC accepting only Euro’s for the payment of oil .

    Like or Dislike: 4  0

    21st January 2013 at 10:47 pm

54. 

    Kill Bill says:

    The Congressional Budget Office stated in its Jan. 2004 report “Paying for Iraq’s Reconstruction”:

    “One major policy question is how much of Iraq’s reconstruction funding should be provided by the country itself. Budgets drawn up by Iraqi planners envision spending about 72 percent of revenues on the government’s day-to-day operating expenses, 23 percent on reconstruction, and about 6 percent on foreign obligations. Overall, the amount that the Iraqi government can contribute to reconstruction will depend on how much revenue it receives from oil exports and how much debt and other foreign obligations it must pay.”
    http://usiraq.procon.org/sourcefiles/CBO-Report-Paying-Iraq-Reconstruction.pdf

    Pummeling Smokey day after day

    He is getting to the point he ignores me even though he challenged me. Why? Cause I am booting his decadent derrier all about the platform. Soon he will be cowering in the emergency life boat below the production deck hoping to stop the uppercuts he is taking. Grab a fire extinguisher cause I am not done flaming your methane spewing arse!! The ring ropes cant hold you up much longer lucky legs!!

    Heh

    Like or Dislike: 1  1

    21st January 2013 at 10:49 pm

55. 

    Kill Bill says:

    KB…I’m more inclined to believe that war with Irag was over the continued survival of the dollar as the world currency. We couldn’t have OPEC accepting only Euro’s for the payment of oil .

    In part that may be so but its Iran that opened a oil bourse and traded in euros IIRC.

    Like or Dislike: 0  2

    21st January 2013 at 10:51 pm

56. 

    Administrator says:

    Since your ticket is an impossibility, it isn’t worth responding. Cheney is busy preparing himself for his eternity in hell. He’ll occupy a space near Hitler, Mao, and RE.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 7  1

    21st January 2013 at 10:52 pm

57. 

    Kill Bill says:

    I don’t need links to bolster my arguments. My arguments stand on their own. -Smokey

    What a crock. I looked back thru the thread and all you gave was your opinion on what MLK was without proving that he actually incited riots.

    Like a court of law if you make the claim then you have to prove that claim.

    You havent done that.

    Like or Dislike: 1  2

    21st January 2013 at 10:53 pm

58. 

    Administrator says:

    KB

    Exit strategies are so 90s.

    Like or Dislike: 1  0

    21st January 2013 at 10:55 pm

59. 

    llpoh says:

    Admin – my ticket is possible – Ron Paul and one of Sarah Palin, Paul Krugman or Bozo the Clown. Which combo would you vote for?!

    Like or Dislike: 0  0

    21st January 2013 at 10:57 pm

60. 

    Administrator says:

    Ron is the intellectual leader of the Liberty movement. He is too old to be President. Maybe Rand, but not until 2016.

    Like or Dislike: 0  0

    21st January 2013 at 10:57 pm

61. 

    THC4SSS says:

    Thanks KB, you know him well.

    Like or Dislike: 0  1

    21st January 2013 at 10:58 pm

62. 

    Administrator says:

    Ron & Bozo.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 8  0

    21st January 2013 at 11:01 pm

63. 

    Kill Bill says:

    KB – Exit strategies are so 90s.-Admin

    Heh

    Like or Dislike: 0  0

    21st January 2013 at 11:04 pm

64. 

    Smokey says:

    THC4SSS—-I am a good person. I have TREMENDOUS confidence in the majority of those fine people who visit this site.
    I do however, consider anyone who asks me to provide links, to be either one lazy cocksucker or else a fucking total imbecile. If you don’t know what to believe, without my posting links, you are a fool. Why don’t you go suck Sonic’s 2″ lizard while Kill Bill licks his neighbor’s collie’s dick ? Then all of you douchebags can gossip about that racist Smokey.
    Speaking of the bottom of the dumpster, I saw your momma fucking a crackhead in one last night, right after he covered her throat with a nice load of sticky stuff. Go fuck yourself.

    Hot debate. What do you think? 5  3

    21st January 2013 at 11:05 pm

65. 

    Smokey says:

    Dick Cheney for POTUS 2012.

    Ron Paul eats shit.

    Like or Dislike: 2  2

    21st January 2013 at 11:09 pm

66. 

    llpoh says:

    Admin – I knew you would go with the smart one.

    Smokey – I don’t often laugh out loud but that last post was a classic.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 8  1

    21st January 2013 at 11:10 pm

67. 

    Kill Bill says:

    Stuck, bless his heart, didnt really need to post a single thing but just demand that Smokey, who made the claim about riots, prove said claim.
    ~~~

    THC4SSS says: Thanks KB, you know him well.

    YW. Maybe Smokey doesnt know how to copy a link and paste it here. I dont know. if thats whats keeping him, or any others, from doing so then:
    Leftclick and hold.
    Drag cursor over text, or url, you want to copy It will highlight the text. Release button.
    Right click then on drop down menu click copy [or use ctrl+c to copy highlighted text]
    Put cursor in the comment box on this site.
    Rich click again and click paste on drop down menu [or use ctrl+v to paste copied text]

    Like or Dislike: 1  2

    21st January 2013 at 11:13 pm

68. 

    Kill Bill says:

    I do however, consider anyone who asks me to provide links, to be either one lazy cocksucker or else a fucking total imbecile -Smokey

    Lazy is not providing links. A lazy person doesnt take the time to find something, copy the text, copy the link and post it here for others to look at if they want. Asking you to provide a link isnt to make me look stupid but to keep you from looking stupid.

    Like or Dislike: 2  3

    21st January 2013 at 11:15 pm

69. 

    Kill Bill says:

    There goes the wayward projectionist with its psychobabble trying to pin its cock delusions on me again.

    I have TWO female dogs. Moron.

    Like or Dislike: 1  1

    21st January 2013 at 11:18 pm

70. 

    THC4SSS says:

    Smokey, so now I’m not a fine person. That hurts. The problem is that I am not a fool who believes everything posted on the internet. That’s why I asked you to back up your claims. I did do a little looking around and most of the bad came from white supremacists web sites. Dude, not looking good for you. Your casual usage of the N word pretty much defines who you are, and you are not a good person.

    Hot debate. What do you think? 5  5

    21st January 2013 at 11:20 pm

71. 

    llpoh says:

    KB – man, I would not have told him that. Right now he is looking for every aberrant act that has ever been performed on or by bitches. It could get ugly. You are lucky he doesn’t use photos.

    Like or Dislike: 4  0

    21st January 2013 at 11:22 pm

72. 

    Kill Bill says:

    KB – man, I would not have told him that. Right now he is looking for every aberrant act that has ever been performed on or by bitches. It could get ugly. You are lucky he doesn’t use photos. -llpoh

    8)

    Like or Dislike: 1  2

    21st January 2013 at 11:25 pm

73. 

    llpoh says:

    THC – the “N” word? Hahahahaha. I bet you still go peepee and number twos. One day maybe you will move up to the “s” word, and, gee willikers, when your balls drop, and mommy isn’t around, you might just test out the “F” word in the mirror.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 8  0

    21st January 2013 at 11:25 pm

74. 

    Kill Bill says:

    
    http://www.ringophone.com/HDanimWP/Smoking%20Monkey%20Funny-239433.gif

    Like or Dislike: 0  0

    21st January 2013 at 11:29 pm

75. 

    Kill Bill says:

    I got a bracket in wrong spot…trying again
    

    Like or Dislike: 3  1

    21st January 2013 at 11:31 pm

76. 

    llpoh says:

    KB – do I have to do everything around here?

    

    Like or Dislike: 3  0

    21st January 2013 at 11:31 pm

77. 

    Kill Bill says:

    Twins!

    Like or Dislike: 0  1

    21st January 2013 at 11:33 pm

78. 

    StuckInNJ says:

    KB — “What a crock. I looked back thru the thread and all you gave was your opinion on what MLK was without proving that he actually incited riots.”

    Ding! Ding! Ding! I hereby declare Kill Bill winner of this debate.

    While The Court fully expects Smokey to continue to rant about penisis, cum, dogs, pussy, niggers, homos, cocksuckers, motherfuckers and sundry other deviant sexual terms — you are nevertheless directed to disregard any and all of them. The matter has been decided. case closed.

    Hot debate. What do you think? 6  4

    21st January 2013 at 11:38 pm

79. 

    Kill Bill says:

    Going to do some reading and to bed

    Later.

    Like or Dislike: 0  2

    21st January 2013 at 11:39 pm

80. 

    llpoh says:

    Stuck – you forgot about dumpster fucking and small lizards. That has gotta be worth bonus points. I almost fell out of my chair. Ali used to get all kinds of points for stylin’.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 7  0

    21st January 2013 at 11:44 pm

81. 

    Smokey says:

    THC4SSS—-Many blacks are fine people. The ones that I call niggers are the ones like Al Sharpton, MLK, Jeremiah Wright, Jesse Jackson who abuse the system , and all those who believe that white society owes them because of slavery. Me calling a worthless crackhead, who lives a life of drugs and crime, a nigger, contains more than a drop of truth. I am an impartial guy.

    There is nothing inherently worse in my use of the N word than in my calling someone a retarded mongoloid douchebag.

    Like, for instance, if I say your mother is a road whore who sucks cocks in hell, is that any less bad than calling MLK an alley nigger ? Especially since both statements are true.

    Like or Dislike: 5  2

    21st January 2013 at 11:54 pm

82. 

    Smokey says:

    llpoh—Later. Crashing now. Good night.

    Like or Dislike: 3  0

    21st January 2013 at 11:57 pm

83. 

    THC4SSS says:

    Smokey, I dislike all the people you do (especially Al and Jessie), I just will not allow myself to use the N word. Its disrespectful to those blacks who don’t deserve it. There are other ways to phrase your dislikes towards those douchebags.

    llpoh, its just the N word I will not say. By using it, everything else said is forgotten.

    Like or Dislike: 2  2

    21st January 2013 at 12:34 am

84. 

    Smokey says:

    THC4SSS—-It’s important to remember what the N word is. Long ago, say 50 years ago, the accepted depiction of what is now commonly refereed to as African Americans, was the word Negro.
    An entire class of fucking white,hayseed, redneck, hick-ass, illiterate country fucks were too lazy or too stupid, probably both, to properly pronounce the word Negro. Their laziness / stupidity converted the word Negro into the slurred word Nigger. And, for whatever reason, the entire generation of blacks have chosen to be offended by the latter version. UNLESS they use the word among themselves, at which point it is accepted jargon. It’s just that WHITE society is not allowed to use the term. Nothing hypocritical about THAT.

    The fact that blacks are offended at the use by whites of the word Nigger is a CHOSEN RESPONSE. They could choose to ignore the use of the word. It is not like they are bombarded with the expression and can’t avoid it. If blacks refer to me in a disparaging way as Whitey, Honky, Soda Cracker, or Cracker, I can ignore the remarks or I can be offended. I choose to ignore the remarks. I would suggest blacks, if they dislike the word Nigger, ignore it.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 7  2

    21st January 2013 at 10:01 am

85. 

    flash says:

    LOL …Gunfight at the OK Corral @ it’s finest.

    Like or Dislike: 3  0

    21st January 2013 at 9:16 am

86. 

    youcanthavemyglock says:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IShbhepwieA

    Like or Dislike: 0  0

    21st January 2013 at 11:41 am

87. 

    youcanthavemyglock says:

    http://www.martinlutherking.org/

    MLK jr is a communist degenerate violent n!gg3r and a plagiarist. Watch the video I posted.

    Like or Dislike: 3  0

    21st January 2013 at 11:56 am

88. 

    JIMSKI says:

    This planet needs an enema…….

    Like or Dislike: 3  0

    21st January 2013 at 12:22 pm

89. 

    Llpoh says:

    Damn, Smokey was a class act. Could he ever light up a room with a smile and good humor.

    Like or Dislike: 5  1

    21st January 2013 at 3:04 pm

90. 

    Cynical30 says:

    Man I really miss Smokey.

    Like or Dislike: 4  0

    21st January 2013 at 5:45 pm

91. 

    AKAnon says:

    Agreed-One of a kind.

    Like or Dislike: 2  0

    21st January 2013 at 1:12 am

92. 

    Wow says:

    Smokey for prez

    Like or Dislike: 2  0

    21st January 2013 at 1:49 pm

93. ~Diversity . . . Through the Eyes of a Child~ | Dreams Drafted says:

    [...] I Have a Dream (theburningplatform.com) Rate this:Share this:FacebookTwitterGoogle +1PinterestEmailPrintLike this:LikeBe the first to like this. This entry was posted in Awareness, Motivation, and Education, Growing with Children…Embracing Motherhood and tagged Children, History, Inspiration, Martin Luther King, Martin Luther King Jr. Day, People, race, Teaching Children. Bookmark the permalink. ← Sharing a Positive Insight . . . Seeding a Movement of Happiness [...]

    Like or Dislike: 0  0

    21st January 2013 at 12:16 am

Leave a comment

• If you feel you have received some value from this site, donations will be gratefully accepted to help support my efforts to provide you with the truth about our unsustainable economic policies

  

• Make Recurring Donation

  

• To Donate by Check

  Mail to: Jim Quinn - P.O. Box 1520, Kulpsville, PA 19443
• 
  
  
  
  
  
  

• Random Quote

  Credit expansion is not a nostrum to make people happy. The boom it engenders must inevitably lead to a debacle and unhappiness. — Ludwig von Mises

• Recent Comments

  • dave on THE BITCH OF BELSEN
  • TPC on NOTHING TO FEAR
  • Calamity on THE BITCH OF BELSEN
  • Stucky on THE BITCH OF BELSEN
  • Administrator on NOTHING TO FEAR
  • TPC on AND THE BAND PLAYED ON
  • Calamity on AND THE BAND PLAYED ON
  • treemagnet on HOLY SWEDISH MEATBALLS
  • TPC on AND THE BAND PLAYED ON
  • Floribunda Rose on AND THE BAND PLAYED ON
  • TPC on AND THE BAND PLAYED ON
  • Calamity on AND THE BAND PLAYED ON
  • Stucky on AND THE BAND PLAYED ON
  • patrick on AND THE BAND PLAYED ON
  • Thinker on AND THE BAND PLAYED ON
  • Eddie on AND THE BAND PLAYED ON
  • TPC on AND THE BAND PLAYED ON
  • Administrator on AND THE BAND PLAYED ON
  • Administrator on AND THE BAND PLAYED ON
  • Administrator on AND THE BAND PLAYED ON

• ADVERTISERS

  Inquiries about advertising opportunities can be made by emailing me at quinnadvisors@gmail.com

• Latest Posts

  • THE BRILLIANCE OF WALL STREET SHILL BOB DOLL
  • THE BITCH OF BELSEN
  • HOLY SWEDISH MEATBALLS
  • TYRANNY HAS ARRIVED
  • DUMBER AND DUMBER
  • THE KILLING FIELDS
  • NOTHING TO FEAR
  • Doug Casey’s Primer on Internatio​nalization
  • Could an Inside Sneak Attack on Bitcoin Destroy It?
  • GOV’T DO-GOODERS KILL MORE JOBS
  • WHAT GOES UP …..
  • QUOTE OF THE DAY
  • CHANGING EDUCATION PARADIGMS
  • AIN’T NO REASON
  • Harrisburg PA Primary Election
  • The Telescreen Is Coming
  • WHAT DID HE KNOW?
  • WALKING AWAY
  • EXISTING HOME SALES NEW HIGH BLAH BLAH BLAH
  • ANTHONY INSERTS HIS WEINER INTO THE RACE
  • PAPER vs THE REAL THING
  • EMPTY CHAIR
  • Massive Commodity Inflation and Investing in Gold
  • BELOW AVERAGE
  • WHERE HAVE ALL THE GOOD PEOPLE GONE?
  • BEND OVER
  • 1,2,3,4…FiF
  • QUOTES OF THE DAY
  • AND THE BAND PLAYED ON
  • ALL YOUR BLOGS ARE BELONG TO US
• 
  
  

• Site Info

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Entries RSS
  • Comments RSS
  • WordPress.org
• 
  
  

  
  
  

• Merchandise

  • TBP Store of Doom

• FINANCIAL

  
  
  
  
  
  
  

• EMERGENCY PREPARATION

  
  
  
  
  
• 
• 
  
  

• Cost of War

• The Gross National Debt

  The Gross National Debt

• Cost of Peak Oil

• Older Articles

  Select Month May 2013  (313) April 2013  (364) March 2013  (412) February 2013  (375) January 2013  (389) December 2012  (384) November 2012  (315) October 2012  (407) September 2012  (375) August 2012  (377) July 2012  (340) June 2012  (312) May 2012  (360) April 2012  (313) March 2012  (403) February 2012  (374) January 2012  (369) December 2011  (297) November 2011  (333) October 2011  (411) September 2011  (325) August 2011  (341) July 2011  (301) June 2011  (292) May 2011  (298) April 2011  (295) March 2011  (378) February 2011  (310) January 2011  (322) December 2010  (282) November 2010  (242) October 2010  (173) September 2010  (223) August 2010  (256) July 2010  (58)

• Favorite Websites

  • 321 Gold
  • Alt-Market
  • AmpedStatus
  • Ann Barnhardt
  • bad things, man
  • Calculated Risk
  • Campaign for Liberty
  • Casey Research
  • Charles Hugh Smith
  • Chris Martenson
  • Credit Writedowns
  • Daily Bell
  • Daily Paul
  • Daily Reckoning
  • Darwin's Money
  • DAVOS' BLOG – Psychopathic Economics
  • Dollar Collapse
  • Doomstead Diner
  • Eric Peters Autos
  • EVERBANK
  • Financial Sense
  • Fourth Turning Website
  • Generations – James Goulding
  • GOLD MONEY
  • Gonzalo Lira
  • Gutless Nation
  • Howe Street
  • Intel Hub
  • James Howard Kunstler
  • Jesse's Cafe Americain
  • John Hussman
  • John Mauldin
  • Lew Rockwell
  • Life After the Oil Crash
  • Market Oracle
  • Media Roots
  • Mike Shedlock
  • Minyanville
  • My Budget 360
  • Naked Capitalism
  • Nassim Taleb
  • Natural News
  • Neil Howe Blog
  • OCCUPY WALL STREET
  • Paul Kedrosky
  • Perot Charts
  • Phil's Stock World
  • Reggie Middleton
  • RON PAUL 2012 STORE
  • Shadow Government Statistics
  • SHTF Plan
  • Sovereign Man
  • Steve Quayle
  • Survival Blog
  • The Daily Crux
  • The Oil Drum
  • The Stangest Brew
  • Turd Ferguson
  • Washington's Blog
  • What is This World Coming To
  • Zero Hedge

• Recommended Books

  • Alas, Babylon
  • Ascent of Money
  • Atlas Shrugged
  • Empire of Debt
  • End the Fed
  • Fahrenheit 451
  • Guns of August
  • H.L. Mencken's Prejudices
  • Huxley's Brave New World
  • Inflated by Chris Whalen
  • Money In America
  • Of Mice and Men
  • Orwell's 1984
  • Orwell's Animal Farm
  • The Fountainhead
  • The Fourth Turning
  • The Grapes of Wrath
  • The Great Deformation
  • The Long Emergency
  • The Real Crash : America's Coming Bankruptcy
  • The Revolution: A Manifesto

• Archive Articles

  • Financial Sense Article Archive
  • Market Oracle Article Archive
  • Seeking Alpha Article Archive

• Fourth Turning Library

  • 21st Century Breakdown
  • 9/11 – A Fourth Turning Perspective
  • A Couple of Fascinating Hours with Neil Howe
  • All You Zombies
  • American Pie
  • As Things Fell Apart, Nobody Paid Much Attention
  • Bad Moon Rising
  • Boomers – Winter is Coming
  • Boomers – Your Crisis Has Arrived
  • China's Fourth Turning
  • Early Stages of a Fourth Turning
  • For What It's Worth
  • Fourth Turning Probabilities
  • Grapes of Wrath – 2011
  • Interview with Neil Howe
  • Know Your Enemy
  • Linear Thinkers are Baffled by Fourth Turning
  • Millenials Get It
  • Neil Howe – The Mood is Darkening
  • Neil Howe on The Fourth Turning: The Coming Age of Conflict
  • NUTS!
  • Rendevous With Destiny
  • The Fourth American Revolution
  • The Fourth Turning – Skies Darkening
  • The Gathering Storm
  • Two Decades of Greed – The Unraveling
  • Unforgiven – Part Five
  • Will 2012 Be as Critical as 1860
  • Will a Prophet Assume Command?
  • Years of the Modern
  • You Ain't Seen Nothing Yet – Part One
  • You Ain't Seen Nothing Yet – Part Three
  • You Ain't Seen Nothing Yet – Part Two

• Archive Articles

  • Financial Sense Article Archive
  • Market Oracle Article Archive
  • Seeking Alpha Article Archive

• Blogroll

  • Documentation
  • Plugins
  • Suggest Ideas
  • Support Forum
  • Themes
  • WordPress Blog
  • WordPress Planet

• Favorite Websites

  • 321 Gold
  • Alt-Market
  • AmpedStatus
  • Ann Barnhardt
  • bad things, man
  • Calculated Risk
  • Campaign for Liberty
  • Casey Research
  • Charles Hugh Smith
  • Chris Martenson
  • Credit Writedowns
  • Daily Bell
  • Daily Paul
  • Daily Reckoning
  • Darwin's Money
  • DAVOS' BLOG – Psychopathic Economics
  • Dollar Collapse
  • Doomstead Diner
  • Eric Peters Autos
  • EVERBANK
  • Financial Sense
  • Fourth Turning Website
  • Generations – James Goulding
  • GOLD MONEY
  • Gonzalo Lira
  • Gutless Nation
  • Howe Street
  • Intel Hub
  • James Howard Kunstler
  • Jesse's Cafe Americain
  • John Hussman
  • John Mauldin
  • Lew Rockwell
  • Life After the Oil Crash
  • Market Oracle
  • Media Roots
  • Mike Shedlock
  • Minyanville
  • My Budget 360
  • Naked Capitalism
  • Nassim Taleb
  • Natural News
  • Neil Howe Blog
  • OCCUPY WALL STREET
  • Paul Kedrosky
  • Perot Charts
  • Phil's Stock World
  • Reggie Middleton
  • RON PAUL 2012 STORE
  • Shadow Government Statistics
  • SHTF Plan
  • Sovereign Man
  • Steve Quayle
  • Survival Blog
  • The Daily Crux
  • The Oil Drum
  • The Stangest Brew
  • Turd Ferguson
  • Washington's Blog
  • What is This World Coming To
  • Zero Hedge

• Fourth Turning Library

  • 21st Century Breakdown
  • 9/11 – A Fourth Turning Perspective
  • A Couple of Fascinating Hours with Neil Howe
  • All You Zombies
  • American Pie
  • As Things Fell Apart, Nobody Paid Much Attention
  • Bad Moon Rising
  • Boomers – Winter is Coming
  • Boomers – Your Crisis Has Arrived
  • China's Fourth Turning
  • Early Stages of a Fourth Turning
  • For What It's Worth
  • Fourth Turning Probabilities
  • Grapes of Wrath – 2011
  • Interview with Neil Howe
  • Know Your Enemy
  • Linear Thinkers are Baffled by Fourth Turning
  • Millenials Get It
  • Neil Howe – The Mood is Darkening
  • Neil Howe on The Fourth Turning: The Coming Age of Conflict
  • NUTS!
  • Rendevous With Destiny
  • The Fourth American Revolution
  • The Fourth Turning – Skies Darkening
  • The Gathering Storm
  • Two Decades of Greed – The Unraveling
  • Unforgiven – Part Five
  • Will 2012 Be as Critical as 1860
  • Will a Prophet Assume Command?
  • Years of the Modern
  • You Ain't Seen Nothing Yet – Part One
  • You Ain't Seen Nothing Yet – Part Three
  • You Ain't Seen Nothing Yet – Part Two

• Merchandise

  • TBP Store of Doom

• Recommended Books

  • Alas, Babylon
  • Ascent of Money
  • Atlas Shrugged
  • Empire of Debt
  • End the Fed
  • Fahrenheit 451
  • Guns of August
  • H.L. Mencken's Prejudices
  • Huxley's Brave New World
  • Inflated by Chris Whalen
  • Money In America
  • Of Mice and Men
  • Orwell's 1984
  • Orwell's Animal Farm
  • The Fountainhead
  • The Fourth Turning
  • The Grapes of Wrath
  • The Great Deformation
  • The Long Emergency
  • The Real Crash : America's Coming Bankruptcy
  • The Revolution: A Manifesto

Connect

• Facebook
• Twitter
• FriendFeed
• Flickr

Popular Tags

• Entries RSS
• Comments RSS
• Valid XHTML
• WordPress