Remembering Martin Luther King Jr. Is Hard

The Assassination Syndrome Non-Violent Connection

There is a lot of what is passed as new information, which like myself, is rather old.

Whose Agenda?

Having lived through the MLK era, and being involved with investigating for my personal inquiry, his life and what constitutionalists were thinking at the time, I found much of the information in this video and more.

The truth in this video may appear forbidden. It is widely buried for sure. It has been available to a limited audience however since the 60s. It remains of limited audience interest. However, a lot of accounts available before, are not surfacing, which means they are being buried.

The Forbidden Truth About MLK: Who Were the Puppeteers Behind Him and What Were Their Goals?

Daily Veracity with Vincent James

_______*-|||-*_______

It is good to keep this part of the research, included in the video, into Martin Luther King’s history. Unfortunately, it is difficult for me to spend the time to research books and old underground periodicals, constitutional conservative literature, and sources of the time to include here, as a lot of this is either missing or hard to find. Vincent may be a better scholar at finding some of this. He is political and well-read.

Comment on the Video

The video is true. But I also believe that Martin Luther King did not care, who advanced civil rights or his stature. Having lived in his time, and having researched him shortly after his death, I found all of this information presented in the video and much more. I also found information that called into question his loyalty to the agenda he was being used to play a part in, as he advanced equal rights under his Civil Rights Movement.

He went to an activist training school for sure. He used insider influence to gain stature and financing for legal infrastructure, etc. But my research from sources I cannot track now, from newsletters sent by mail at the time, old newspapers, and other sources, indicated statements he made in private demonstrated a mistrust for the agenda of some of those around him. Once he had succeeded in establishing equal rights as a middle-class agenda, I found serious questions as to the activities developing of those around him at the time of the assassination at the motel. He indicated in speeches and in private, he was in danger, and may not be protected as usual. It was too ambiguous to point any fingers then or now.

Big MLK, BLM, and Todays Left Differences

A significant difference exists between BLM and MLK on rioting. MLK condemned all riots immediately and called them actions that did not serve Negroes or America. To me, in my research, this represented a split between his communist, Left Wing Jewish-financed enablers. Remember he was also a student of Gandhi. Read all his books, and associated with those in the non-violent movement.

It is difficult to embrace Gandhi's teachings and the goals of leftism for very long. Non-violence is not a part of the leftist agenda. Gandhi was also killed, in my opinion by the same forces as promoted killing MLK, and Malcolm X.

Malcolm also came to embrace non-violence, due to a dream where he saw all races serving Allah in their way, under a greater plan. He was developing the black-owned business community model, like the early Black Panthers, when he was assassinated.

The original Panthers were of course infiltrated, and taken out, as the group changed from the Black neighborhood empowerment model, including the right to bear arms, to a Black revolution movement-image.

MLK Legacy

I know it must be a bit frustrating for readers to find me going on about memories, I can’t trace conveniently 60 years later. It is frustrating for me as well because I always thought there was no reason to keep volumes of boxes of stuff on MLK when you are not a reporter. At the time you think, these documents will always be recorded for history and if I ever want them I’ll just easily research them later. HA HA HA. Jokes on me.

However, I was in High School during his time, and one of my best friends was the son of two communist party members. When the Martin Luther King movement came up in conversation, they were on the fence about some of his proposals and speech content. He was not completely in line with the party’s thinking in their opinion and those in their local party cell, and the party couldn’t fully endorse him. So my memories of what I read in my research are reinforced by this association.

Different Times - 60’s Liberal, Today’s Left

It will be difficult for Vincent and others, fed up with the liberal lies of the 20th century, to distinguish between the more classic and questioning of every-issue mindset, of what was called the liberal left and mainstream middle of the time. The closed-minded message of today’s left is more in line with the extremist hard-core communist thinking of my high school friends’ parents. Also, I can say that because of that association, I came to realize that many things influencing government were done in secrecy. They were sworn to secrecy in their party cell.

His parents could tell me that people in the party were closely working with MLK, and so they knew things firsthand. But they couldn’t say anything about who they were, even if their names had appeared in print, or what anyone did. The fact of communist party activity in the MLK movement was widely known but minimized in the press. There was no reason for them to deny that.

But because we were kids, and they had contributed to my conversion to anti-Vietnam war status, they let things slip, which made me wonder, how much MLK was being used, and how much of his mission was his own agenda.

Gandhi Connection - Natural Law

One wonders how much of the BLM agenda Dr. King would have embraced today. There are questions about how much of both Gandhi’s and Martin Luther King’s legacies, the left embraces today. There are even differences of opinion in the King family.

Gandhi’s non-violence is a cosmology of how political power naturally falls to the People, and the steps that can be used to regain power, with moral authority, in times of administrative authoritative criminality against the laws of nature, and the People. Would Gandhi, Dr. King, or Malcolm X be in favor of the present level of authoritarianism and technocratic planning, in the global system today? Or did they have to be taken out? The early Black Panthers clearly were local control, private business/property oriented, and authoritarian-hesitant.

Violence, Non-Violence

Without researching and considering all the factors remembering Martin Luther King remains hard. Here’s one more thing. After Malcolm had his dream he broke with the Muslim sect he was with.

Just before his death, he met briefly with MLK. This article details their history of significant disagreements but renders this detail.

Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X Only Met Once

On March 8, 1964, disillusioned with Muhammad’s private life and angered over the group’s refusal to take a more active role in the fight for civil rights, Malcolm publicly broke up with the Nation of Islam.

On March 25, King and Malcolm were both on Capitol Hill watching a Senate hearing regarding legislation aimed at ending segregation in public places and racial discrimination in employment. The bill had been proposed by President John F. Kennedy following intense lobbying by King and others and was being shepherded through Congress by President Lyndon Johnson, despite harsh opposition by many southern elected officials.

As King was wrapping up a press conference, he was approached by Malcolm, and the two shook hands and exchanged greetings. As cameras clicked away, Malcolm expressed his desire to become more active, saying, “I’m throwing myself into the heart of the civil rights struggle.” Then, just as quickly as it began, the brief meeting between the two legends was over. Four days later, opponents launched one of the longest filibusters in U.S. history to defeat the legislation, but it eventually passed and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was signed into law on July 2.

Dr. King then was for government power to fund negro interests and eliminate discriminatory laws, as contained in the original civil rights bill. But also he believed in meritocracy, and government funding local solutions, with larger international and national human rights objectives. We know he had problems with some parts of the bill. He saw states’ rights as getting in the way of both human rights and local constitutional rights at times. His main problem was govt. lack of authority to enforce basic human rights in legislation.

BLM, CRT?

It is hard to know how his reasoning for the need for human rights enforcement in legislation, would have been incorporated into Marxist, discriminatory authoritarian, slanted historic models like BLM and CRT. Would he have considered government allocation of Black reparations a fool’s errand, or would he be on board?

There were Black Conservatives in the 60s, even Black chapters of the John Birch Society. Many saw him as a communist agent. Some met with him or his groups and were not pushed away, but, like the Communist Party not officially associated with. Because then, like now, the Constitution is a politically marginalizing factor.

King needed to show some kind of victory at the time, to keep the movement from falling apart. The Civil rights legislation represented a victory opportunity. He couldn’t afford to be marginalized in the controlled press, or political establishment. He was not a legacy then. Just a Black leader who may or may not significantly succeed in advancing negro issues in that decade.

More of the literature from these various groups, available at the time, should be uncovered and examined in order to get a clearer idea of where Martin Luther King would stand relative to today’s so-called Black issues, civil rights, and their inclusion in the global economic/political, technocratic agenda of 2030.