In the early evening of April 4, 1968, a gunshot rang-out in the Memphis sky. It immediately shattered the peace and quiet of an otherwise uneventful day at the Lorraine Motel, and soon after, the peace of an entire country.
The death of Martin Luther King Jr., at the hands of James Earl Ray, brought about a period of unrest and Black violence that has been matched only occasionally since. Worse, it engendered more than half-a-century of anti-White discrimination and public policy which has transformed America from a peaceful, prosperous land into a country wherein almost one-in-four working-age people are forced to accept some form of government assistance (the numbers are much worse when non-working-age seniors and children are factored-in). Black-on-White crime is rampant; more than 650,000 Whites are beaten, robbed, raped, or murdered by Blacks every year–and that number is steadily rising. Yet, for more than a quarter of a century, the federal government and all 50 states have officially declared the third Monday in January, “Martin Luther King Jr. Day.” Here’s why you shouldn’t celebrate such an anti-American holiday.
Thirty-nine years prior to Mr. Ray’s fateful rifle-shot, Martin Luther King Jr. was born Michael King Jr., the eldest of three children to Michael and Alberta King, on January 15, 1929. Michael Sr. was a Southern Baptist preacher with a traditional fire-and-brimstone temperament who believed that dancing and playing cards were evil and regularly “whipped” little Mike for bad behavior.
In 1934, after a tour of Palestine at his congregation’s expense, Michael Sr. (perhaps believing the prestige of Martin Luther among Southern Baptists would lend him more cachet) declared that, henceforth, he would be called Martin Luther King, and that little Mike would be known as Martin Luther King Jr. The names stuck; both men used them for the rest of their lives.
The Canonization of Martin Luther King Jr.
Besides the inherent dishonesty of using Martin Luther’s name to convey credibility, there is not much untoward thus far; the enigma of who was the real Martin Luther King Jr., begins in college. (See “The Fundamental Dishonesty of the Man” below.) However, after his death, the establishment undertook a campaign to lionize King. Using their control over the institutions of power (particularly the media, academy, and government), they created a carefully crafted image that portrays him as a saint, who only ever exuded love and concern for humanity — an image that relies heavily on the fact that King’s FBI surveillance records have been sealed until 2027. However, quite a bit of information is available, and if one ignores the hagiography and considers original sources, a much darker, even sinister figure emerges. Mr. King (no one should address him as “doctor” or “reverend” for reasons revealed below) was a profoundly dishonest charlatan who regularly associated with criminals, traitors, and other deviants, both for reasons of personal gratification and as part of a quest to destroy White America and all other White nations in order to institute global governance. Many non-Whites believe globalist institutions like the UN will favor them over Whites, if not in the language of their policies, then certainly, in their enforcement.
The Fundamental Dishonesty of the Man
King became a leading “civil rights” advocate, in part, because of his bombastic speeches. Speeches in which he often quoted the Bible and talked about the “truth setting us free.” But the man was fundamentally dishonest “abode not in the truth, because there [was] no truth in him.” His near-constant paltering led J. Edgar Hoover to call him “the most notorious liar in the country.” And Hoover would know. As the director of the FBI and its predecessor (the Bureau of Investigation), for almost 50 years, Hoover investigated thousands of the country’s most notorious criminals. And he had direct experience with King.
For instance, Hoover once informed the House Appropriations Committee that the “civil rights” movement was rife with communists, King denied this indisputable fact (read more about this in “His Communist Associations” below) and said that Hoover “has allowed himself to aid and abet the fallacious claim of southern racists and extreme right wing elements.” King, like Cultural Marxists everywhere, was fond of claiming that any and all Whites, with a healthy concern for the legitimate collective interests of their people, are extreme right-wingers who suffer from a pathology known as “racism.”
King’s duplicity goes far beyond merely lying about his communist associations and his deceptive methods. It permeates the fabric of his life. As part of Operation SOLO – a long-running campaign to discover the depths of communist control of important government and cultural institutions – the FBI kept Martin Luther King, Jr. and many of his associates under surveillance, for years. This scrutiny exposed a large number of dark secrets King tried to keep hidden. Not the least of which was hours of recorded sexual liaisons with women (many of whom were prostitutes), revealing his penchant for adultery.
Specifically, they discovered that King “had violated the Mann Act” of 1910 which made it illegal to transport women across state lines for “prostitution, debauchery, or any other immoral purpose.” King’s sexual appetites were well-known by his friends and associations. His philandering was legendary as he ceaselessly cheated on his wife. During one such liaison, after spending time with several different women on the same night, King, the advocate of non-violence, quarreled with one of them and struck her, knocking “her across the bed,” according to good friend and fellow “reverend,” Ralph Abernathy.
On another occasion, officials who have listened to Operation SOLO tapes of King recorded on January 6, 1964 (less than three months before he died) say he betrayed his wife that night by engaging in sexual congress with a White woman and can be heard shouting such witticisms as “I’m not a Negro tonight!” and “I’m f*****g for God!”
Further, most of King’s acclaimed speeches were written by others, including his much ballyhooed “I Have a Dream” speech, which was written largely by Jewish leftist activist Stanley Levison. Although this deceptive practice of making presentations as if they are one’s own, without attribution, is widely accepted today, the similar practice of plagiarism is not. King frequently copied the works of others without attribution. Many of his ghost-written speeches and his writings have parts that are plagiarized, but perhaps most conspicuous was his doctoral dissertation. After years of rumors and hearsay about King’s doctoral plagiarism, Boston University finally commissioned a committee to look into it. It found that as much as 45 percent of the first part of his thesis and 21 percent of the second, was copied from the works of others, without proper attribution. Despite this, the intrepid institution determined that “no thought should be given to the revocation of Dr. King’s doctoral degree.”
Most would agree that it’s difficult, if not impossible, to assess what’s in a man’s heart, that is, what he sincerely believes to be true, but it’s equally difficult to believe that someone who is recorded by the FBI screaming “I’m f*****g for God!” is truly Christian. It’s perhaps even more difficult to believe that such a man is a sincere believer when he spent his professional life parading around as a Christian minister while openly (at least to his friends and family) adopting godless communism (see “His Communist Identity” below) as the foundation on which his entire career was based. This is the epitome of artifice.
His Sexually Aberrant Behavior
The section above on King’s fundamental dishonesty concerning his serial philandering briefly mentioned his fondness for group sexual intercourse. The Black syndicated columnist Carl Rowan uncovered more. Rowan was initially a fan of King. He was willing to blame the “racial” biases of the FBI and, in particular, J. Edgar Hoover for any and all revelations of King’s true nature. Later, he developed a more realistic opinion of King after discovering that Attorney General Robert Kennedy ordered the wiretapping of King, and not Hoover. He further learned, during a conversation with an FBI agent, that the wiretap recordings showed that there were regular occurrences of “sexual intercourse” involving the two men, including at least one “orgy.”
Also, he discovered that Hoover had “at least 15 reels of tape” involving the sexual exploits of King and Abernathy that revealed a homosexual relationship between the two “Christian” ministers. Black newspaper writer and television talk show host Tony Brown mentioned the recordings of King and Abernathy behind closed doors and quoted King saying to Abernathy, “Come on over here, you big, Black motherf*****, and let me s*** your d***.”
The Frequently Violent Results of His “Non-Violent” Activism
For a man dedicated to “non-violence” and promoting peace and understanding between the races, King was involved in a considerably large number of riots. One could be excused for thinking that he just happened to be victim of circumstances over and over again, but those who have studied his campaigns present a vision that contravenes his image as a man of peace.
The Louisiana Legislative Committee once observed that King was responsible for “leading the Negroes in the South down the road to bloodshed and violence.” And the prominent Black labor-lawyer, Louis Waldman, disclosed that:
The philosophy and purpose of Dr. King’s program … is to produce ‘crisis-packed’ situations and ‘tension.’ Such a purpose is the very opposite of nonviolence, for the atmosphere-of-crisis policy leads to violence by provoking violence. And the provocation of violence is violence. To describe such provocation as ‘nonviolent’ is to trifle with the plain meaning of words.
This echoes the discussion above about King’s methods, which are, to sum:
- Put rabble-rousers on the street;
- Create a tension packed situation;
- Bait the police and any counter-protesters to get them to act-out physically;
- Scream “racism” and police brutality.
This program served him well in initiating dozens of confrontations that culminated in thousands of injuries to protesters, counter-protesters, police, and even innocent bystanders, including the death of another preacher. As fellow Black “civil rights” leader J. H. Jackson, the former president of the National Baptist Convention, recounts it, King caused violence in every region of the country by encouraging riots, including “designing the tactics that led to a fatal riot,” which caused the death of Reverend A. O. Wright in Detroit.
Such a tactic works only when the cause has strong support in the media and other sectors of the establishment, as King’s did. There is a huge difference in establishment response to King’s confrontations compared, say, to Charlottesville. Claims by Alt Right participants that they were victims of leftist violence and that police collaborated with the leftists fall on deaf ears. The media has no interest.
Many other leaders of the Black community felt as Jackson did, namely, that King was doing more harm than good and asked him to leave their cities. After the violence and chaos that followed in the wake of King’s many disruptive “civil rights” marches and demonstrations in 1966, Reverend Henry Mitchell, the leader of a group of Black ministers in Chicago (representing approximately 50,000 congregants), said that King “brought hate” and asked that he “get the hell out of here.” And added that Blacks in Chicago wanted “peace, love, and harmony,” not the violence that came to town with King.
His Communist Identity
Although Martin Luther King Jr. repeatedly denied he was a communist and the establishment used their control over the institutions of power in this country (and the world) to keep his communist leanings hidden, the “duck test” applies: if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. King’s associations, actions, and argot mark him as a particularly virulent communist. Reams have been written on this topic and it is outside the scope of this article to document all of King’s communist behaviors, so I’ll just mention a few salient facts.
Scores of King’s close friends and top associates have been linked to communism.
For example, The Washington Observer Newsletter, reporting on an FBI document about King’s ties to noted communist, Stanley Levison, said:
. . .[W]hen the F.B.I. agents had King under surveillance, they observed him meet a well-identified Soviet espionage agent at the Kennedy Airport in New York. They also secured evidence that King was receiving large sums of money from a well-known American Communist agent who gives King instructions that he implicitly obeys.
Levison’s Wikipedia page notes that he was treasurer for the American Jewish Congress, a defender of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg, and was considered by the FBI to be a major funder of the Communist Party USA in the 1950s.
Although they’ve done everything in their power to prevent people from becoming aware of King’s vast network of connections to communists and communist organizations, whenever someone does expose those connections, his apologists go into damage-control mode and say that he was not a communist but was merely duped and used by them. However, Michael Laski, the founder of the Communist Party USA (Marxist-Leninist), a splinter group of the Communist Party USA., expounded on King’s commitment to communism when during a press conference held on April 13, 1967, he revealed:
King knows what’s going on. He is allowing himself to be utilized by the Communist Party . . . King willingly enters into an alliance with the Communist Party . . . Mr. King receives support from organizations and individuals that are tied to the Communist Party. He knows what is happening . . .
King’s Hatred for White America
When one comes to understand that the true purpose of communism, as Karl Marx envisioned it, is not to control the means of production in such as way as to redistribute wealth from a few undeserving rich to the masses, but rather to redistribute the wealth of the nations to the Jews, then one can see that communism is globalism and globalism is treason to humanity. Because, historically, the vast majority of the world’s wealth was produced by White working-class men and, in fact, still is produced by Whites (although more and more of it is produced by the technocracy rather than the working-class) it’s easy to see why the sharp spear-point of that treasonous agenda is aimed directly at White nations.
As has been established above, Martin Luther King Jr. was a willing participant in that agenda. One has to ask, Why? The answer is simple, King had an atavistic hatred of White America. It’s already been shown that many Black leaders in the “civil rights” movement, including Henry Mitchell, felt that King “brought hate” with him everywhere he went and Senator James Eastland revealed that one of King’s major financial backers, CORE, is the “war department for those who sell hate.”
But King was closely allied with another group: the Southern Conference Education Fund (SCEF). The forerunner of the SCEF was the Southern Conference on Human Welfare (SCHW), which, after being outed as a communist front, changed its name, but kept just about everything else, including its address (808 Perdido Street, New Orleans, Louisiana), it’s official periodical (The Southern Patriot), at least 11 of its officers, including both its President and Executive Director, and most importantly its mission. Which, according to one of its founders, Paul Crouch, “was intended to lead to class hatred and race hatred, dividing class against class and race against race.”
But we don’t have to rely solely on the testimony of others to learn about Kings hatred of White America. We have King’s own words.
When King was a child, he, like many children before and since, became alienated from a friend. This other child happened to be White. Because of this, King felt that the child rejected him and resolved to “hate every White person.” He kept that promise until he met communist revolutionaries in college who, although they had strong anti-White identities were deemed White, because of their skin-color.
In another example, King demonstrated a strong willingness to see institutional favoritism for Blacks. While leading the Montgomery bus boycott (which made him famous), King made several demands for the special treatment of Blacks, including the mandatory “employment of Negro bus drivers for predominantly Negro routes.” One has to wonder how he – or anyone, for that matter — would feel if the reverse were suggested. In fact, its highly unlikely King would have accepted concessions on this demand if it came with the equalizing condition of mandatory employment for White bus drivers for predominantly White routes.
Finally, we have the government’s own determination of King as a virulent racist. In 1967, when the FBI’s Counter-Intelligence Program (COINTELPRO) began targeting Black “hate groups” as well as White nationalist groups, King’s Southern Christian Leadership Conference was added to the list of organizations to be investigated. Almost certainly it was added not just because of King’s personal history of ranting against Whites, but also because of his association with Blacks who commonly expressed hatred of Whites and their desire to cause them harm or even kill them: men like Elijah Muhammad, Malcolm X, Stokely Carmichael, and even Muhammad Ali (the latter, seemed to, at least partially, recant in his later years).
Martin Luther King Jr. was an unmitigated liar, an unconscionable plagiarist, and a philanderer, who engaged in countless affairs where he expressed his particular brand of polymorphous perversity, occasionally violently. He engaged in any number of unlawful acts and most of his “nonviolent” demonstrations ended in savage riots during which property was destroyed and people were hurt — sometimes even killed. And finally, he spent his entire life promoting communism and anything else he deemed destructive (or as he liked to call it “disruptive”) to the traditional American way of life.
So, you have to ask yourself, why would any sane American celebrate this swindler? Or allow their children to? Real America/forgotten America/White America must reclaim political power in order to control our destiny, until then we can’t even do simple things like prevent our government(s) from declaring this monster a saint and forcing us to celebrate him, but we do have the power to say, “no more” and to ensure that we don’t personally recognize Martin Luther King Jr. or his “holy day” and to teach our children the truth, not only about the man, but also about his hostile agenda.
(Author’s Note: Most of the above was gleaned from Mark Farrell’s Why the Martin Luther King, Jr. Holiday Should Be Repealed: M.L.K. Jr.’s Life and the Aftereffects, consequently most of the citations are his. The exceptions are citations: 1, 2, 8, 13, and 14 which are this author’s.)
 Louise Quayle et al., Martin Luther King, Jr.: Dreams for a Nation (New York: Fawcett Columbine, 1989), 14.
 Ibid., 16.
 Congressional Record (May 29, 1968), E4784-4785.
 Congressional Record (April 23, 1968), E3205.
 Congressional Record (May 29, 1968), E4784.
 Congressional Record (May 28, 1968), E4750, citing the Saturday Review (April 3, 1965).
 Congressional Record (September 13, 1965), [S]22708.
 Congressional Record (April 11, 1968), E3005.
 Ralph Abernathy, And the Walls Came Tumbling Down (New York: Harper & Row, 1989).
 Edgar S. Brightman, The Finding of God.
 Martin Luther King, Jr., The Place of Reason and Experience in Finding God.
 Theodore Pappas, “A Houdini of Time,” Chronicles, (November 1992), 26-30.
 Theodore Pappas, “Redefining Plagiarism,” Chronicles (September 1993), 42.
 Congressional Record (May 16, 1968), E4307; citing John Milton, “Black Power Joins ‘Poor’ Ranks,” Columbus Citizen-Journal.
 Carl Rowan, Breaking Barriers: A Memoir (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1991), 255.
 Ralph de Toledano, J. Edgar Hoover: The Man in His Time (New Rochelle, New York: Arlington House, 1973), 331.
 Ibid., 332
 Carl Rowan, Breaking Barriers, 255.
 Tony Brown, “The Worst Kind of Uncle Tom,” Birmingham Times (February 21, 1991).
 Congressional Record (October 4, 1967), H13008.
 Ibid., H13007.
 Ibid., H13008.
 Congressional Record (June 15, 1967), S8277.
 Congressional Record (May 29, 1968), E4786, E4788; citing Louisiana Legislative Committee Hearings, Part II (March 6-9, 1957), 203-208.
 Congressional Record, October 4, 1967, H13007.
 Congressional Record (May 29, 1968), E4786.
 Congressional Record (May 16, 1968), E4311.
 Congressional Record (October 4, 1967), H13009.
 Congressional Record (May 25, 1961), 8349-8350.
 Congressional Record (April 11, 1968), E3005.
 Karl Prussion, Documentary Report on Martin Luther King
 Congressional Record (April 11, 1968), E3005, citing the Washington Observer Newsletter (February 15, 1966).
 Congressional Record (May 16, 1968), E4311.
 Congressional Record, (October 3, 1983), S13455.
 Congressional Record (May 16, 1968), E4309.
 Clayborne Carson, Malcolm X: The F.B.I. File (New York: Carroll & Graf Publishers, Inc., 1991), 22.
 Chronicle of the 20th Century (Prentice Hall Trade, 1987), 780.
 Carson, Malcolm X, 26.
 Congressional Record (May 29, 1968), E4786.
 Congressional Record (October 4, 1967), H13005.