• Home
• About
• Read Me
• Features
• Lessons
• Resources

Blacklist or Whitewash? The Man Who Would Be "King"

On the occasion of the American national holiday approaching, the only one given for an individual (an honor not given to others, such as individual American presidents), I’d just like to remind you all that we live in a world of deception, of carefully crafted personae, of appearances and behind-the-scenes treachery.

The holiday, as you know, is Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Day. You can read glowing praises for him at such sites as Wikipedia, which extol the virtues of this man and practically elevate him to sainthood. Any attempts to sully his shining reputation are brushed aside as conspiracy theory or the FBI trying to get rid of a civil rights leader by fabricating evidence. But even in their defenses of him, some very disturbing truths emerge. In an age where it is politically correct to dig up dirt on American founders and leaders, I think it’s only fair to take the same shots at anyone claiming (or having claimed for them) greatness.

So I went looking for links, and of course the ones worshipping King are easy to find. But I had to dig to find some that dared to question the official stories, and here are a few:

Richard John Neuhaus said of King: Dr. King was, for all that was great about him, an adulterer, sexual libertine, lecher, and wanton womanizer. Neuhaus is a well-known liberal theologian and writer. My research also indicates that King was a drunk, plagiarist, bisexual, and Marxist. Try to remember that we are not concerned with his race or complexion, but his character. (Source: Was MLKJ A Good Man?)

Then we learn more: Mr. King had a fake name, among other things:

Born in 1929, King was the son of a Black preacher known at the time only as Daddy King. Daddy King named his son Michael. In 1935, Daddy King had an inspiration to name himself after the Protestant reformer Martin Luther. He declared to his congregation that henceforth they were to refer to him as Martin Luther King and to his son as Martin Luther King, Jr. None of this name changing was ever legalized in court. Daddy King’s son’s real name is to this day Michael King. (Source: The Beast as a Saint: The Truth about MLK)

You’ll notice that the Wiki article takes the opposite view, that listing Michael King on his birth certificate was a mistake. Really.

The article at the following link is especially revealing, in that the writer still considers King a great American. Excuses are made for his sexual degeneracy, plagiarism, and Communist ties, yet the charges are not denied. For a supporter to do this speaks volumes about the veracity of the claims. WARNING: The material at this link contains sexually explicit descriptions and foul language.

The most sordid charges about MLK’s sex life, this one included, come from the FBI and can’t necessarily be trusted. But there’s no doubt about what one biographer calls King’s compulsive sexual athleticism.

As every reasonable observer has commented, neither King’s sexual wanderings nor his scholarly misdeeds detract from his core achievement. (Source: Was MLKJ a Plagiarist?)

Wow... you can be a degenerate and a liar and still be praised for your core achievement! And while the FBI typically gives us no reason to trust them, the facts even admitted by supporters tend to give them the benefit of a doubt in this case. Why distrust the FBI’s account of King and then in the next breath say Yeah, he did it? Why only reject their claim of his Communist ties and not their claim about his sexual misdeeds? Is an observer only reasonable if they swallow the whitewash and call all this evidence blacklisting?

We report. You decide.