Dr.ML King 48 Assassination Anniversary – King betrayed and Killed by Masonic Brothers


King Remembrance Week 2016 – Martin Luther King Jr …

The Martin Luther King, Jr. National Historic Site and Ebenezer
Baptist Church will commemorate the annual observance of King
Remembrance Week which honors the life and legacy of the Reverend Dr.
Martin Luther King, Jr. April 4-8, 2016. To commence the Park’s week
long series of public activities, a special Wreath-Laying Ceremony will
take place at Historic Ebenezer Baptist Church, Heritage Sanctuary in
Atlanta, Georgia on Monday April 4, 2016 at 5:30pm. This year marks the
48th anniversary of the death of Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Dr. King was assassinated on April 4, 1968 at the Lorraine
Motel in Memphis, Tennessee and was brought home to be buried in the
Sweet Auburn community. On April 9, 1968, his funeral took place at
Historic Ebenezer Baptist Church and Morehouse College. To reflect upon
that solemn occasion in history, the National Park Service along with
members of Ebenezer Baptist Church will place a replica of the 1968
wreath on the historic location of Ebenezer Baptist Church, Heritage
Sanctuary as it appeared on April 9, 1968. There will be a brief program
with remarks by National Park Service officials and other dignitaries
before laying the wreath upon the church’s façade.

KING CENTER COMMEMORATES MLK ASSASSINATION …

Dr. King is assassinated – Apr 04, 1968 – HISTORY.com

 

April 4th Commemoration | National Civil Rights Museum

civilrightsmuseum.org/april4th-commemo…
National Civil Rights Museum

The annual April 4th Commemoration at the National Civil Rights Museum is a … life and legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. on the anniversary of his death at the Lorraine Motel on April 4, 1968. … music selections, a ceremonial wreath laying and a

 The King Assassination Conspiracy: Betrayed by Judas

On March 28 1968 King was leading a march
in downtown Memphis when a masonic planned riot broke out and two Negro Masonic
assassins chased King and Abernathy with the intent to assassinate both King
and Abernathy on March 28.

King and Abernathy were able to find
refuge at a white business until the white print shop owner was able to safely escort
King and Abernathy out of town.  

On April 3, 1968, Loree Bailey, the co-owner of
the Lorain Motel received a call from a member of Kings inner circle in Atlanta
requesting that a specific room on the second floor be reserve for King.
(King had always stayed in a secure room on the 1st floor.) On April 4,
Loree Bailey overheard a member of Kings entourage asking him to come out of
his room and speak to a small group that had assemble in the parking lot.
Loree Bailey knew that King was in bed suffering from a severe headache but
this member of Kings inner circle insisted that King come out and talk to the
people. King reluctantly came out of his room to speak to the small crowd when
he was shoot. Loree knew the identity of the Judas who had Dr. King set-up
to be assassinated. There
were Negro masonic assassins  in Memphis the day of
the assassination
one from Forrest City Arkansas. Were these  the same assassins who attempted to kill King a week earlier?  According to testimony from eye witnesses from the King
family vs. US government trial, the gun smoke came from the bushes across from
the motel and not from the bathroom window at the boarding
house where Ray had stayed. 


Dr. ML King and Loree  Bailey were killed by Negro Masonic Assassins doing the dirty work of their white masonic slave masters.

Photographer Ernest Withers doubled as FBI informant

mlk.jpg
Was the Judas who betrayed King following orders from his Masonic White Master?
Loree
Bailey was killed, hung in the stairwell of her motel only hours after
the King assassination. The official cover-up statement said that Loree
Bailey had a stroke on April 4th and died a few days later.
Who
was the Judas who set-up King? Was King assassination a Masonic hit?
Was a beer distributorship part of the payoff?Steve Cokley said it best
in his video.

 

 

 

Assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. (4 April 1968)

 

 

Posted: April 4 2015 3:00 AM
martin_luther_king_jr_nywts 

The Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. in 1964World Telegram & Sun by Dick DeMarsico/Wikimedia Commons

 

The 47th
anniversary of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination should
inspire us all to reimagine this political revolutionary’s final act as a
statesman and civil rights leader.
In the afterglow of the March on Washington and the
Selma-to-Montgomery march, King became a pillar of fire, rejecting the
course of political moderation and social reform that had made him
palatable to white leaders and a hero to African Americans.
King’s final years
found him linking the struggle for racial justice to a wider crusade to
end war and poverty. Tellingly, his comprehensive approach, which
focused on changing America’s foreign and domestic policies as well as
hearts and minds, found him under attack by critics who claimed that he
was in over his head on the subject of Vietnam and foolish to break with
former ally President Lyndon B. Johnson.
The radical King formed an anti-war political alliance with black
power leader Stokely Carmichael. On April 15, 1967, in New York City, King and Carmichael
headlined the largest anti-war rally in American history to that date,
placing two of the era’s leading black political activists at the
forefront of a still-unpopular anti-war movement.
King had also publicly repudiated the war in Vietnam exactly one year
to the day before his death in a speech at Riverside Church in New York
City. His speech, “Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break the Silence,” announced
his formal break with both the Johnson Administration (he would never
visit the White House again) and political moderation.
Journalists and newspapers immediately attacked King for going beyond
his civil rights portfolio into the world of foreign policy and
international politics. Many publicly denounced him for having
irrevocably damaged the black freedom struggle by linking it to the
Vietnam War. King’s public approval ratings dropped precipitously among
whites and blacks for his uncompromising stance.
His final speech, in Memphis, Tenn., where he aided 1,000 striking
black sanitation workers, concluded with biblical references to having
seen the “promised land,” and is noteworthy for its rhetorical and political combativeness.
In words that would not sound out of place at contemporary #BlackLivesMatter protests, King asserted that “the greatness of America is the right to protest for right.

King’s political evolution remains unacknowledged by most of the
American public, leading to the irony of critics of the
#BlackLivesMatter movement asserting that contemporary protesters would
do well to follow in the footsteps of King and other heroes of the civil
rights era. Missing from such criticism is the reality of the later
King, the prophet who, after being recognized in his own lifetime, was
thoroughly disregarded by past allies, politicians and the public for
speaking truth to power in a manner that made the entire nation
uncomfortable.

At the end of his life, King asserted that racism, militarism and materialism represented the greatest threats to humanity that the world had ever seen. History has proved King’s words to be prophetic.
The massive protests that erupted last year in the wake of grand jury
decisions not to indict police officers in Ferguson, Mo., and Staten
Island, N.Y., represent, in both symbolic and substantive ways, a
continuation of the radical King’s political work.
Updating King’s “triple threat” means understanding the ways in which
the militarism of which he spoke has invaded our domestic sphere
through mass incarceration; how materialism promotes the largest income
and wealth gap between the rich and poor in American history; and how
institutional racism contours our current social, political and economic
systems.
King spent his whole life preaching an unusually eloquent message
that black lives mattered. His two most famous political sermons (at the
March on Washington in 1963 and in Montgomery, Ala., in 1965) were
broadcast by every major television network.
Yet there were many more radical speeches to be made, ones that
linked political revolution to radical policy changes that went beyond
the vote, that advocated economic redistribution and an end to war,
along with a “revolution in values
designed to transform the very foundations of American democracy. It is
this King whom #BlackLivesMatter demonstrations most accurately reflect
and honor, even as he’s the one our nation continues to ignore.

Peniel E. Joseph, a contributing editor at The Root, is founding director of the Center for the Study of Race and Democracy

 

Assassination Conspiracy Trial

Reprint from the King Center:

After four weeks of testimony and over 70 witnesses in a civil trial in
Memphis, Tennessee, twelve jurors reached a unanimous verdict on
December 8, 1999 after about an hour of deliberations that Dr. Martin
Luther King, Jr. was assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. In a
press statement held the following day in Atlanta, Mrs. Coretta Scott
King welcomed the verdict, saying , “There is abundant evidence of a
major high level conspiracy in the assassination of my husband, Martin
Luther King, Jr. And the civil court’s unanimous verdict has validated
our belief. I wholeheartedly applaud the verdict of the jury and I feel
that justice has been well served in their deliberations. This verdict
is not only a great victory for my family, but also a great victory for
America. It is a great victory for truth itself. It is important to know
that this was a SWIFT verdict, delivered after about an hour of jury
deliberation. The jury was clearly convinced by the extensive evidence
that was presented during the trial that, in addition to Mr. Jowers, the
conspiracy of the Mafia, local, state and federal government agencies,
were deeply involved in the assassination of my husband. The jury also
affirmed overwhelming evidence that identified someone else, not James
Earl Ray, as the shooter, and that Mr. Ray was set up to take the blame.
I want to make it clear that my family has no interest in retribution.
Instead, our sole concern has been that the full truth of the
assassination has been revealed and adjudicated in a court of law… My
husband once said, “The moral arc of the universe is long, but it bends
toward justice.” To-day, almost 32 years after my husband and the father
of my four children was assassinated, I feel that the jury’s verdict
clearly affirms this principle. With this faith, we can begin the 21st
century and the new millennium with a new spirit of hope and healing.”

Adobe PDF – View as html

Across from the Lorraine Motel was Fire Station no. 2. Who ordered … to the question did Loyd Jowers participate in a conspiracy to do harm to Dr. Martin Luther King, your …

www.tucradio.org/Who_killed_MLK.pdf
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.









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?”




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:

background to the assassination;
local conspiracy;

the crime scene;
the rifle;
Raul;
broader conspiracy;

cover-up.

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.


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, Newsum was eventually told he had been
transferred by request of the police department.

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.”)



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.”

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.


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.


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:
Judge Joe Brown;
Judge Arthur Hanes Jr.;
William Hamblin.

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.”
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.”
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.”



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. . . . 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.” .
. . 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.

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.”

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.


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.



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.

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 at http://www.thekingcenter.com/tkc/trial.html.)
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!”

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.

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

 

Martin Luther King‘s murderer — newly released photos and …
… when gunned down while standing on the balcony of the Lorraine Motel. … restaurant owner was sued in civil court as part of a conspiracy to murder Martin Luther King.

www.digitaljournal.com/article/305238

  • Background to the assassination

  • Local conspiracy
  • The crime scene
  • The rifle
  • Raul
  • A broader conspiracy
  • Cover-up
Advertisements

World AIDS Day 12-1-2012 – Origin of AIDS – Eugenics and The Elite Depopulation Program

More than two-thirds of the estimated 34 million people living with
HIV/AIDS worldwide are in developing countries, and nearly three-fourths
of the 2.5 million new HIV infections in 2011 occurred in these
countries. As a science-based public health and disease prevention
agency, CDC provides support to more than 70 countries to strengthen
their national HIV/AIDS programs and build sustainable public health
systems through the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief<img class=”externalImg” title=”External Web Site Icon” alt=”External Web Site Icon”
CDC works side by side with Ministries of Health in these
countries and with other partners to implement sustainable HIV/AIDS
interventions and to measure their effectiveness in reducing infections
and deaths from HIV/AIDS.

Worldwide AIDS & HIV Statistics Including Deaths – 9:25pm

World HIV & AIDS epidemic statistics, including people infected with HIV and deaths from AIDS. 25 Million Dead






Region Adults & childrenliving with HIV/AIDS Adults & childrennewly infected Adult prevalence* Deaths ofadults & children
Sub-Saharan Africa 22.4 million 1.9 million 5.2% 1.4 million
North Africa & Middle East 310,000 35,000 0.2% 20,000
South and South-East Asia 3.8 million 280,000 0.3% 270,000
East Asia 850,000 75,000 59,000
Oceania 59,000 3900 0.3% 2,000
Latin America 2.0 million 170,000 0.6% 77,000
Caribbean 240,000 20,000 1.0% 12,000
Eastern Europe & Central Asia 1.5 million 110,000 0.7% 87,000
North America 1.4 million 55,000 0.4% 25,000
Western & Central Europe 850,000 30,000 0.3% 13,000
Global Total 33.4 million 2.7 million 0.8% 2.0 million




  • Scaling up treatment of HIV-positive people (“treatment as prevention”). Recent science (HIV Prevention Trials Network–HPTN 052 Adobe PDF file [PDF – 275KB]External Web Site Icon)
    has shown that when people are HIV-positive, treatment with
    antiretroviral drugs helps prevent the transmission of HIV to others.
    Effective treatment of a person living with HIV reduces the risk of
    sexual transmission to a partner by up to 96%. As of March 2012, CDC,
    through PEPFAR, helped support nearly 4.5 million men, women, and
    children on treatment.

    CDC’s High-Impact HIV Prevention Adobe PDF file [PDF – 258KB]
    strategy aims to reduce new HIV infections by using combinations of
    scientifically proven, cost-effective, and scalable interventions
    directed to the most vulnerable populations in the geographic areas
    where HIV prevalence is highest. For example, young gay and bisexual
    men, especially young African American and Latino men who have sex with
    men, have high rates of new HIV infections.

Human Experiments Conducted Under Depopulation Efforts for HIV Research

Susanne Posel

Occupy Corporatism

August 3, 2012

The Obama administration has given $80 million in grants to corporations working to produce AIDS related medication ; essentially using taxpayer money to help pharmaceutical companies in an initiative called AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP).

ADAP has been demanding more and more funding
while their assistance program has not been stellar, and leaves many
suffering from HIV/AIDS on waiting lists with no end in sight.

The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) are planning a study
of ADAP programs wherein they will use the data to create a more
comprehensive network list of people affected by HIV/AIDS. Simply put:
the US government, under the guise of developing comprehensive
understanding for the purpose of assisting the drug corporations, they
are creating an extensive list of all Americans afflicted with HIV and
AIDS related complications.

On the east coast of America, volunteers from out-reach centers have begun going door-to-door
in a community in Southwest Philadelphia telling residents to get HIV
tested. They believe that by conducting these invasions of privacy for
the sake of coercing more people to get tested for HIV, they can control
the spread of the disease.

In Washington, DC, the International AIDS Conference (IAC) has ended.
The Clinton Foundation (CF), founded by former President Bill Clinton,
focused their talks on the cost of HIV-positive patients in
under-developed nations. Because of their lack of access to proper
medical care, their drain on their respective nations is “less than
previously thought” according to the CF.

Clinton was concerned about removing children from their mothers who
are diagnosed with HIV so that the spread of the virus would begin to
stop in African countries like Ethiopia, Malawi, Rwanda and Zambia.

Under the Clinton HIV/AIDS Initiative
(CHAI) begun in 2002, the relationship between drug corporations and
governments has expanded and the delivery of pharmaceuticals has
increased, although the incidents of HIV/AIDS have not decreased. CHAI
provides more access to medical healthcare, yet the issue is still
running rampant.

Globalist conferences like the IAC celebrate the eugenics connection to HIV/AIDS. In a recent study
conducted by the Fenway Institute, black men in America who are
homosexual are twice as likely as their white counterparts to contract
the virus.

In July 2008, the mainstream media (MSM) admitted
that, strangely enough, “people of African descent are much more likely
to have a genetic trait that makes them more susceptible to infection
with the HIV virus.”

Scientists conducting the study and working for the Wilford Hall
United State Air Force Medical Center and San Antonio Military Medical
Center claims: “The benefit that the Africans got from a mutation that
gave them some resistance to malaria has, statistically at least,
rendered them some increased susceptibility to HIV.”

While medications and vaccines were pushed a solutions at the IAC,
these answers only serve to increase profits from drug corporations
while more and more people continue to suffer and die at the race
directed bioweapons called HIV.

The end result of the IAC was in accord that drugs at the answer to the HIV “problem”.

HIV testing was allocated as the biggest proponent of capturing the
scope of the effect this eugenics directed bioweapon is making on the
over-population problem. Truvada was agreed to be the best vaccine
available and supported by the conference attendees as a pharmaceutical
worth investing in.

The suggestion was also made that women be forced to have a vaginal ring soaked in an “HIV-blocking drug” implanted should their husbands or partners refuse to wear condoms on a regular basis.

African governments have approved the trials of US scientists working
for Mircobide Trials Network and the US National Institute of Health
will go into heavily populated areas and give women these rings dipped
in dapivirine which is a drug that will slowly “ooze” out of the ring
and lace the surrounding vaginal tissue.

The NIH-funded study called ASPIRE
will force more than 3,500 women in Malawi, South Africa, Uganda,
Zambia and Zimbabwe to have this test application inserted for a month.
Using human experimentation, the NIH hopes to offer this solution to
more under-developed nations and eventually worldwide.

The efforts into the destruction of the human immune system by the
global Elite are reaching an apex, or perhaps just going into hyper
drive. As long as the fact of HIV’s origin as a bioweapon
is ignored by MSM and the alternative media, the possibility of
stopping this eugenics-based depopulation design will continue on
without serious research into stopping it.

And the endeavors of the global Elite of depopulating the planet by 90% may come true quite soon.


“AIDS, NIXON and AMERICA’S FUTURE: PL91-213” President Nixon Sign Law to Create AIDS for Genocide and Depopulation
“AIDS, NIXON and AMERICA’S FUTURE: PL91-213” by Boyd E. Graves, J.D.. It is hard to believe the public law that authorized AIDS will be thirty one years old

HIV/AIDS The Untold Story. The Genecide Theory

An early version of the AIDS-as-biowarfare theory was based on the work of two East German scientists, Jakob and Lilli Segal, published by the Soviet news agency Tass on March 30, 1987. The Segals claimed that HIV could not have evolved naturally, being in fact an artificial splice between visna virus (a retrovirus that infects the nervous system of sheep) and HTLV-1 (the first retrovirus known to infect humans). This splice, they asserted, was created at the notorious CBW lab at Fort Detrick, Maryland, and then tested on prisoners in the area.
On World AIDS Day, Doctor Says More Pediatrics AIDS Drugs Needed
Voice of America – 21 hours ago
By Joe DeCapua HIV, the AIDS virus, not only infects adults, but also affects many children. Millions have become orphans, and many are infected at birth.
33 million people live with HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. 190 countries around the world recognize this day to raise awareness that the battle is not over in the fight against the world’s number one health threat.
An International Conference on AIDs will be held in Africa, December 3 through 7.
In the U.S., the Black AIDS Institute is asking the Obama administration to set up a domestic funding program for HIV/AIDS prevention, according to BET.The institute says this is increasingly a black issue as about half of the over one million Americans living with HIV or AIDS are black.
Increasingly women and girls are finding themselves part of the growing numbers, with about 11 percent of newly reported AIDS cases contracted either through sex with infected men or injected drug use. African American woman accounted for 66 percent of the newly diagnosed cases in 2005, according to theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention.
The New York Times, in an editorial, says that the WHO developed a mathematical model predicting what would happen if most adults and adolescents were tested every year for the AIDS virus, and those who were positive were treated immediately with antiretroviral medications. The policy now is to use the drugs after your immune system is depresse
Do the Elite, through government and private sector scientists, create and distribute deadly viruses to world populations (more)
5.0

Dr Alan Cantwell

Smallpox Vaccine Triggered AIDS Virus

On May 11, 1987, The London Times, one of the world’s most respected newspapers, published an explosive article entitled, “Smallpox vaccine triggered AIDS virus.” The story suggested the smallpox eradication vaccine program sponsored by the WHO was responsible for unleashing AIDS in Africa. Almost 100 million Africans living in central Africa were inoculated by the WHO. The vaccine was held responsible for awakening a “dormant” AIDS virus infection on the continent.
An advisor to the WHO admitted, “Now I believe the smallpox vaccine theory is the explanation for the explosion of AIDS.” Robert Gallo, M,D., the co-discoverer of HIV, told The Times, “The link between the WHO program and the epidemic is an interesting and important hypothesis. I cannot say that it actually happened, but I have been saying for some years that the use of live vaccines such as that used for smallpox can activate a dormant infection such as HIV.” Despite the tremendous importance of this story, the U.S. media was totally silent on the report, and Gallo never spoke of it again.
In September 1987, at a conference sponsored by the National Health Federation in Monrovia, California, William Campbell Douglass, M.D., bluntly blamed the WHO for murdering Africa with the AIDS virus. In a widely circulated reprint of his talk entitled “W.H.O. Murdered Africa” , he accused the organization of encouraging virologists and molecular biologists to work with deadly animal viruses in an attempt to make an immunosuppressive hybrid virus that would be deadly to humans. From the Bulletin of the World Health Organization (Volume 47, p.259, 1972), he quoted a passage that stated: “An attempt should be made to see if viruses can in fact exert selective effects on immune function. The possibility should be looked into that the immune response to the virus itself may be impaired if the infecting virus damages, more or less selectively, the cell responding to the virus.” According to Douglass, “That’s AIDS. What the WHO is saying in plain English is Let’s cook up a virus that selectively destroys the T-cell system of man, an acquired immune deficiency.'”
see
Babies born with AIDS
AIDS baby born with heart outside stomach
AIDES Baby
youngest_preemie_baby_amillia.jpg
Depopulation (Rockefeller Foundation – UN)
Human experiments –
in the ‘free world’?
“Glaxo has sponsored at least four medical trials since 1995 using Hispanic and black children at Incarnation. The documents give details of all clinical trials in the US and reveal the experiments sponsored by Glaxo were designed to test the ‘safety and tolerance’ of Aids medications, some of which have potentially dangerous side effects. Glaxo manufactures a number of drugs designed to treat HIV, including AZT. “
UK firm tried HIV drug on orphans
MUST READ: The house that AIDS built
Human experiments –
in the ‘free world’?
“Glaxo has sponsored at least four medical trials since 1995 using Hispanic and black children at Incarnation. The documents give details of all clinical trials in the US and reveal the experiments sponsored by Glaxo were designed to test the ‘safety and tolerance’ of Aids medications, some of which have potentially dangerous side effects. Glaxo manufactures a number of drugs designed to treat HIV, including AZT. “UK firm tried HIV drug on orphans


MUST READ: The house that AIDS built
By Liam Scheff
This brave article deals with pharmaceutical abuse in a children’s home in NYC


It was through Maggiore that I met Mona, whose children, Sean and Dana, have tested HIV-positive. By the state’s definition, they’re not actually her children; Mona is their great aunt and legal guardian. Her niece, a long-time drug user, was unable to act as a responsible mother, so Sean and Dana were remanded to state foster care. Mona took them back to raise as her own.


When I first spoke with Mona, she was stressed and nervous. Sean had twice been sent to the Incarnation Children’s Center (ICC), a “home for HIV positive children” located in Washington Heights. First, as an infant, then again four years ago. And Dana was there until June.


“Why did they take her?” I asked.
“They said I was a negligent parent because I didn’t want to give the drugs.”
She’d been taking Sean and Dana to a naturopath. That the children were healthy didn’t matter. When city agencies found out that the children weren’t on the drugs, they took them away for mandatory treatment at a clinic and then transferred them to ICC. There, they were locked up and pumped full of drugs day and night.
“What drugs?”
“AZT, Nevirapine, Epivir, Zerit. All kinds of drugs.”
Diseases and National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, and huge pharmaceutical companies such as Glaxo, Pfizer, Squibb and Genentech?is to take a trip through the nightmare world of pediatric drug research.
For example, the study called “The Effect of Anti-HIV Treatment on Body Characteristics of HIV-Infected Children” is looking for the causes of “Wasting and Lipodystrophy [fat redistribution]”?by using drugs known to cause wasting and lipodystrophy.
Or consider “The Safety and Effectiveness of Treating Advanced AIDS Patients between the Ages of 4 and 22 with Seven Drugs, Some at Higher than Usual Doses.” The seven drugs in the study are all known to cause debilitating, potentially fatal side effects, yet they are administered at “higher than usual doses” in four-year-olds.
Then there’s a study with “Stavudine Alone or in Combination with Didanosine.” Stavudine plus Didanosine has killed pregnant women.
Or the vaccine study to be administered to children “12 months to 8 years” using “live chicken pox virus,” even though one of the consequences of a live virus vaccine can be the disease itself.
Another measures “HIV Levels in Cerebrospinal Fluid.” Cerebrospinal fluid can only be gathered from a spinal tap, a dangerous and invasive procedure.
There’s even a study on HIV-negative children born to HIV-infected mothers that uses an experimental HIV vaccine.
Mona was never informed that Sean had once participated in clinical trials at ICC. – more

 

The History of the Development of AIDS

by Boyd E. Graves, J.D.. The true history of the origin of AIDS can be traced …. In 1970, President Nixon signed PL91-213 and John D. Rockefeller
1971 U.S. Special ‘HIV’ Virus Flow Chart Download LinkThe Smoking Gun of AIDS: a 1971 Flowchart by Boyd E. Graves, J.D. www.boydgraves.com/flowchart/
The Making of the AIDS Holocaust by Dr. Boyd E. Graves March 15, 2003Boyd Ed Graves, JD discovered the United States’ secret 1971 Special Virus www.boydgraves.com/letters/031603.html

AIDS/Graves

In 1970, President Nixon signed PL91-213 and John D. Rockefeller, III became the …. Boyd Graves now believes that HIV-AIDS is probably an evolutionar



Kissinger and Rockefeller the Origins of AIDS and Ebola


Gary Allen – The Rockefeller File 439 reads. Rockefeller John D 16 reads. Boyd Graves‘ ESP-1 (HIV/AIDS) Development Timeline 121 reads http://www.scribd.com/…/Kissinger-and-Rockefeller-the-Origins-of-AIDS-and- EbolaThe Rockefellers and the Osborns

An important point to be made when covering these issues is that the very same families who had previously funded and popularized eugenics in America prior to World War II shifted their resources into funding and promoting population reduction and control in the post WWII era.

Several prominent families are responsible for funding and promoting eugenics in America, namely the Rockefeller, Carnegie, Harriman, and Osborn families. Two families, the Rockefellers and the Osborns, are particularly significant. John D. Rockefeller Sr. contributed a large amount of money to build the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in the early 1900’s, which housed the Eugenics Records Office from 1910-1944. Rockefeller influence also spread overseas to Germany, where the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Psychiatry, and the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Eugenics, Anthropology and Human Heredity resided. Much of the money used to run these facilities came from Rockefeller. [5] These institutes became centers for Nazi eugenics programs during the reign of Adolf Hitler.

The influence of the Rockefeller family continued in 1945 when John D. Rockefeller Jr. donated the land upon which the United Nations stands in New York City. The U.N. plays an important roll in population control, a subject which will be covered shortly.



In 1952, John D. Rockefeller the 3rd, the oldest son of Rockefeller Jr., founded the Population Council. The organizations stated goal is to seek “…better understanding of problems relating to population.” [6] The first president of the Council was Frederick Henry Osborn, who was appointed by John D. Rockefeller himself. Osborn was a prominent eugenicist who helped found the American Eugenics Society, now called The Society for the Study of Social Biology. Osborn headed the AES from 1946-1952, when he began to place greater emphasis on population control, signaling the shift of post WWII eugenicists. [7] Osborn wrote in his 1968 book The Future of Human Heredity that “Eugenic goals are most likely to be attained under another name than eugenics.”



Frederick Henry Osborn’s nephew, Henry Fairfield Osborn, carried on the banner of population control. His 1948 book Our Plundered Planet covers many of the issues that environmentalists are concerned with today. Osborn states in the book that over-population will destroy the planet and that drastic measures must be taken to curtail population growth. He takes a moment to reflect on the savage nature of his outlined proposal, but states that it will have to be done. He writes,

“Of course, as we all know, these are momentous days and many things can happen to check population growth, even including the devastating use of atomic bombs in a new war. It is difficult to adjust one’s mind to the possibility that the present negotiations between nations could fail to prevent such a savage denial of the right to human existence, and that the problem of the pressure of increasing populations – perhaps the greatest problem facing humanity today – cannot be solved in a way that is consistent with humanity.” [8]

Steven C. Rockefeller, a fourth generation member of the family, has remained dedicated to the family’s history of philanthropy and promotion of population control. He played a central role in the writing of the United Nations Earth Charter, and chaired the Earth Charter International Drafting Committee from 1997 to 2000. He is currently a member of the Earth Charter Commission. [9] Echoing past writings of Osborn and others, he stated in an interview at Tilburg University in the Netherlands that,

“Third, the Earth Charter recognizes that the dramatic rise in human population is putting great pressure on the resilience of ecological systems and has overburdened social and economic systems.” [10]

The Earth Charter itself says, “An unprecedented rise in human population has overburdened ecological and social systems. The foundations of global security are threatened. These trends are perilous but not inevitable.”



Others involved in the post WWII shift



Before we look at recent examples of population reduction being funded and carried out, there are other prominent individuals who played an important role in this shift from eugenics to population control.



Frank Notestein was one of the most prominent individuals who made the study of population an institutional practice. His bio summarizes his numerous memberships, which include the American Eugenics Society.

“He was a member of the American Eugenics Society, the American Philosophical Society, the Council on Foreign Relations, the International Statistical Institute, the International Union for the Scientific Study of Population, the Population Association of America, and the Century Association.” [11]

Notestein also served as president of John D. Rockefeller’s Population Council after Frederick Osborn stepped down. He was also the first director of the United Nations Population Division from 1946-1948. In a 1969 paper written by Notestein titled The Problem of Population Control, he outlines a strategy to depopulate target populations. Notestein admits that economic modernization would “…bring the birthrate down automatically.” However, he goes on to state that more drastic measures must be taken because in his opinion this method would not be fast enough. He writes,

“Given existing preferences in family size, governments must go beyond voluntary family planning. To achieve zero rate of population growth governments will have to do more than cajole; they will have to coerce.”



“…to impose more drastic changes on a large scale implies many risks, not least to the regime that undertakes them. The price for this type of population control may well be the institution of a totalitarian regime.” [12]

Another individual, Guy Irving Burch, who wrote for Margaret Sanger’s Birth Control Review publication, also played a key role. Burch’s 1947 book Human Breeding and Survival combines the ideas of both eugenics and population control. He writes,

“It appears what the United Nations needs to do is to recommend to all nations that adoption of laws which will… actually lead to the sterilization of all persons who are inadequate, either biologically or socially, and encourage the voluntary sterilization of normal persons who have had their share of children.”

Burch described plans for attaining “peace goals” and national security objectives through population control. Similar arguments and proposals are made in Henry Kissinger’s later 1974 National Security Study Memorandum 200, which was influenced by the 1944 Royal Commission on Population. Burch states that, “… if we are willing to keep the focus on undesirable parentage… then sterilization can play a rather large part in the attainment of the peace goals…”



Richard C. Reardon writes again in his Eugenics Connection work in progress regarding Burch, pointing out the shift from Galton era eugenics to Malthusian population control,


“The ideas of Galton were becoming unpopular, so the ideas of Malthus needed to be stressed. If the public could be made to believe in the need for quantity control, they would again accept its logical extension – quality control. So in 1940, while serving as director of his Population Reference Bureau and the editor of its Population Bulletin, Burch helped found another “population” front for eugenicists – the Population Association of America.” [13]

Population reduction operations today



In 1989 research was conducted by the National Institute of Immunology in New Delhi India on the use of ‘carriers’ such as Tetanus Toxoid and Diphtheria to bypass the immune system and deliver the female hormone called human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG). The research paper was carried in the Oxford University Press in 1990 and was titled “Bypass by an alternate ‘carrier’ of acquired unresponsiveness to hCG upon repeated immunization with tetanus-conjugated vaccine.” [1]



While hCG is required to maintain pregnancy, the injection of hCG bound to Tetanus Toxoid triggers an auto-immune response, thus causing sterilization. The NII research cited above used four women as test subjects – who had been surgically sterilized prior to the experiment – and found that multiple doses of the Tetanus Toxoid hCG carrier vaccine was required in order to achieve the desired results. The research also found that if an alternate carrier such as Diphtheria was used as a booster in combination with Tetanus the sterilization vaccine would be more effective.



The Rockefeller Foundation and the Population Council are listed in the document as giving grants for the research.



Henry Kissinger’s 1974 National Security Memorandum 200 document cites “Injectable contraceptives for women” as a possible method of population reduction and control. Depopulation, as stated in the document, should be pursued because it would be in the “…economic interests of the United States.”

“Wherever a lessening of population pressures… can increase the prospects for such stability, population policy becomes relevant to resource supplies and to the economic interests of the United States.”

On November 4, 1996 the publication Vaccine Weekly carried an article titled “Study Suggests Women Were Injected with Contaminated Tetanus Vaccine.” The article details an investigation that was carried out by the Philippine Medical Association into the discovery of hCG in tetanus vaccines. While the article brands the vaccine as being “contaminated”, the Rockefeller funded research cited above indicates that this is not a case of contamination. As reported,

“Have women in the Philippines, and possibly elsewhere, surreptitiously been used as guinea pigs in an international anti-fertility campaign?



A medical study in the Philippines suggested that may well be the case. A study conducted by the Philippine Medical Association on behalf of the Philippine Department of Health revealed that almost 20 percent of the tetanus vaccine sampled positive for the hormone human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG), according to Human Life International.



Vaccines containing the hormone immunize women not only against tetanus but also against pregnancy by inducing the body’s immune system to attack the hormone needed to bring an unborn child to term.” [2]

Thailand is ripe with stories of miscarriages and sterilization. According to the local population of the Akha, pregnant women are forced to receive a tetanus vaccine in order to get ID cards for their children. The vaccine often results with violent miscarriages. In the video below, Matthew McDaniel, a human rights activist who has been working with the Akha people of Thailand, speaks with two Akha women about the forced Tetanus vaccine and the resulting miscarriages.

International AIDS Conference Attracts Eugenicists and Race

theintelhub.com/…/international-aids-conference-attracts-eugenicists-…

Jul 31, 2012 – Susanne Posel | The 2012 International AIDS Conference (IAC) has attracted 40000 of the world’s leading scientists, researchers, advocates and eugenicists They are making a final push in their final days trying to kill off the .


Is Winthrop Rockefeller the father of Bill Clinton?
President Clinton was born William Jefferson Blythe III on August 19, 1946, in Hope, Arkansas located on the 33rd Degree Parallel. Illuminati News: 33 Degrees – Number of the Master When he was four years old, his mother wed Roger Clinton, of Hot Springs, Arkansas. In high school, he took the family name Clinton.
Bill Clinton rise to power is not based on who he knows but rather who he is, a Rockefeller
There has long been speculation about the real identity of the actual biological father of the former United States President William Jefferson Clinton. According to Bill Clinton’s White House biographyhis real father was Bill Blythe III, who had been killed in an automobile accident before the President was even born; however many in Arkansas claim that Blythe had only been back in the United States for six months prior to Clinton’s birth.
William Jefferson Clinton ran for the United States House of Representatives (not the Arkansas State house) less than six month after getting his law degree from Yale Law School. He served as Jimmy Carter’s Arkansas state campaign manager, while also teaching at the University of Arkansas School of Law, and also manages to get himself elected as the Arkansas State attorney general in 1976, and elected as the governor of the state of Arkansas in 1978 (having only been in public services for less than two (2) years).This means that Bill Clinton began campaigning for the Arkansas U.S. congressional seat while he was still in law school at Yale University. The he ran a statewide campaign for state attorney general, while running another statewide presidential campaign for Jimmy Carter and taught law school when??…all at the same time. Then with less than a year experience as the state’s top judicial officer, he begins campaigning as the state’s governor and actually wins…just five years out of law school and then the youngest state governor in the United States of America.WINTHROP ROCKEFELLERWinthrop Rockefeller was son of John D. Rockefeller, Jr. and Abby Greene Aldrich, and the grandson of John Davison Rockefeller, Sr. who founded the Standard Oil Company. His brothers were John D. III, David, Nelson and Laurence Rockefeller. Winthrop Rockefeller also went to Yale University, 1931-1934.
Abby G. Aldrich, was the daughter of Senator Nelson Aldrich. Senator Aldrich was instrumental in the creation of the Federal Reserve
share http://www.wikio.com Blog Directory Subscribe with Bloglines
Top Blogs blogarama - the blog directory
Current Events & News Blogs - Blog Rankings Site Meter

Mitt Romney and the Kingdom of the Cult – The Truth About Mormonism and The Book of Mormon

Truth about Mitt Romney – Mormonism and the Book of Mormons – Romney Video Goes Viral

  1. Romney Mormon video goes viral

    Politico‎ – 5 hours ago
    A day before the election, a video that depicts a visibly angry Mitt Romney defending his faith has become a viral hit. The clip, which according
 

Internet evangelist condemns Billy Graham for supporting Mitt Romney

Brian Triplett
by Brian Triplett – in 269 Google+ circles – More by Brian Triplett

Oct 25, 2012 – Mitt Romney’s run for president and for chan. sons of Satan when high profile men of God like Billy Graham and supposed Christian leaders

 undefined

Doctrines of the Latter Day Saints of deception (Mormons/LDS)

(most of the following bullet statements were extracted from the Kingdom of the Cults, by Dr. Walter Martin). The Mormons believe in many gods – these gods

What Do Mormons Believe? An Introduction – Part 1 – YouTube

 

What Do Mormons Believe? An Introduction – Part 1 – YouTube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b06GvLyE8sIOct 8, 201015 minUploaded by CrosstalkAmerica
Jill is the Managing Editor on Walter Martin’s 45 year bestseller, The Kingdom of the Cults, and co-founder
...

Billy Graham’s Website Removes ‘Mormonism’ From Cult List – ABC

abcnews.go.com/…/billygrahams-website-removes-mormonism-fro…

Oct 18, 2012 – Billy Graham has taken public steps to embrace Mitt Romney for What’s next, a charge of your position on satan from bad to good!

MORMONISM DECLARED WAR ON CHRISTIANITY : Apprising

apprising.org/2012/04/20/mormonism-declared-war-on-christianity/

Apr 20, 2012 – Martin classified Mormonism as a non-Christian cult because: is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom.

Mitt Romney’s Mormon cult and Billy Graham’s Christian cult | True

Hosea 4:6

My people are destroyed
for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also
reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast
forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.

 

Prominent African-American Southern Baptist Condemns

 Prominent African-American Southern Baptist Condemns Mormonism as Racist | Brian Kaylor, Dwight McKissic, Mitt Romney, SBC, Mormonism

ethicsdaily.com/prominent-african-american-southern-baptist-conde…

 A prominent African-American Southern Baptist pastor hopes messengers at next week’s annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention will pass a
resolution condemning Mormonism as racist.
The move by Dwight McKissic, a pastor in Arlington, Texas, comes as some Southern Baptist leaders attempt to rally support for Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, whose Mormonism makes some conservative evangelicals weary. McKissic posted the full text of his proposed resolution, which he sent to the SBC’s Resolution Committee for consideration, earlier this
month on his blog. However, McKissic’s resolution on the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints could spark the most controversy as it places him at odds with claims made by other Southern Baptist leaders in the midst of a heated presidential campaign.
In the resolution, McKissic claims “growing awareness, acceptance and influence [of Mormonism] in  contemporary American culture” will lead
“some to study or accept the Mormon Religion as valid.” Thus, he urges Southern Baptists to speak out on the racial problems of the faith.
In addition to critiquing the Mormon adoption of authoritative books other than “the King James Holy Bible,” McKissic’s resolution claims that while “in 1978, the Mormon Church has denied and denounced racism
and agreed to permit Blacks to the priesthood, they are yet to denounce the racist teachings.”
McKissic ends his resolution by having Southern Baptists declare that
“we repudiate the racist teachings recorded in The Book of Mormon and The Pearl of Great Price.

“This issue must be dealt with if Southern Baptists are to be consistent with what they have historically taught about Mormonism;”
McKissic wrote, “and if they are to be viewed by Black Baptists as simply finding Mitt Romney’s Mormonism and the racist views of his Bible more tolerable than President Obama’s skin color; this is how this
discussion is being played out in Black barber shops, Black beauty
salons and Black churches. If Southern Baptists support this resolution,it will say to the Black Community that they find Mitt Romney’s
Mormonism and the racist views of his Bible abhorrent; but if they vote for him, it will be strictly because of philosophical and policy issues
and positions, and not a vote against President Obama’s complexion.”

Rick Santorum Called Mormonism ‘Dangerous Cult‘ In Minds Of

MORMONISM CULT – Exposing Mormonism Cult

Expose Mitt Romney, Mormon cult member

www.exposemittromney.com/



Expose Mitt Romney is dedicated to exposing the duplicitous campaign being run by this high ranking member of the Mormon cult.

Mormon plan to establish a world theocracy from America.

 

ormon

Rising Christian Imperialism Fueled by Dominion Theology.  The article is mainly about the danger of Far Right Christian  dominionists gaining control after the Obama failure brings about a Far  Right backlash in America.

Little did I know when I wrote it that there is already a plan in  place to establish a world theocracy from America. It is part of Mormon  prophetic doctrine. Now some might say that this is just some pipe dream  of a cult. However, if you read this article you might not be so  complacent. Mormons have been working toward that end for 160 years and  they have infiltrated high levels of government especially top secret  intelligence positions. One of their own Bishops, Mitt Romney, is still  one of the top contenders for President of the United States in 2012.

Title: Republican Mitt Romney and the “Mormon Plan for America” … LDS Prophet who was also priest and king over America. Not many Americans know that LDS founder …

Exposing Satanism Witchcraft and the New World Order

To this truth seeker, this quote is very troublesome for a couple of fairly obvious reasons. … Luciferian religion – and the parallels to Mormonism are totally stunning. …. to the FACTS of our Mormon history, nor the very real POSSIBILITY that the … was Sovereign Pontiff of Universal Freemasonry, and Head of the  Illuminati ..

The Oath of Vengeance against the American people and the … the United States Senate to have Reed Smoot, a Mormon … and avowed enemies of the American nation.” (Confessions of ...

1857massacre.com/MMM/oath_of_vengeance.htm

Mormonism is Luciferian & Masonic. April 25, 2012 (Designated GOP … who consider themselves Republicans will not vote for a Mormon. They know it is a cult, but



… day Saints (sometimes known as the “Mormon Church” by the media). She is currently taking a religion … “For in those days there shall also arise false

www.mormonbeliefs.org/3193/false-christs-false-prophet

“What evidence do you have that the Mormon Jesus and Satan … below (note that Sata n is also

Romney’s ‘Family Came From a Polygamy Commune,’ says

Brian Schweitzer: Mitt Romney’s ‘Family Came From a Polygamy

http://www.thedailybeast.com/…/brian-schweitzer-mitt-romnApr 19, 2012
I am not alleging by any stretch that Romney is a polygamist and Romney’s  father, George—who

Romney’s ‘Family Came From a Polygamy Commune,’ says Montana Gov.

Mitt Romney will likely struggle nationally, particularly with  women, because his father was “born on a polygamy commune in Mexico,”  said Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer.

FACT CHECK: Romney on his dad growing up poor – Yahoo! News

news.yahoo.com/fact-check-romneydad-growing-poor-205237369….

Miles Park Romney had five wives and 30 children, and fled to Mexico after passage of the 1882 Edmunson Act that barred polygamy. George Romney’s father .

ROMNEY FAMILY FILES: FLED TO MEXICO TO PRACTICE POLYGAMY

gratewire.com › General Open Forum

Smith knew the affect it might have on his community and after polygamy began to Mitt Romney’s father, George S. Romney was born in Mexico in the. Colonia ..

Daily Kos: Mitt Romney’s Dad was on Welfare

http://www.dailykos.com/story/…/-Mitt-Romney-s-Dad-was-on-Welfare

Sep 5, 2012 – Interesting note, that I originally saw from a post on Buzzflash, was that George Romney, Mitt Romney’s father, was on welfare early in his life, 

Mitt Romney’s father, George Romney, was public aid recipient as

http://www.boston.com/&#8230;romneyfathergeorgeromney…/story.html

Sep 19, 2012 – But his own father was once among public aid recipients. As the Globe has previously reported, George Romney’s family fled from Mexico in

Welfare Wasn’t Always A Dirty Word In The Romney Family : It’s All

Sep 19, 2012 – It was there that Mitt Romney’s grandfather Gaskell and father, George, were born into an increasingly prosperous family and Mormon ..


George Romney, born on polygamist colony, touted as immigrant

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/…/romney-born-george-craig.html.csp

Aug 30, 2012 – “It’s easy to forget that the story of my father’s success begins with the voters Thursday, drawing on his late grandfather, George Romney,

Introducing The 55 Wives Of Brigham Young

Brigham Young Wives

Brigham Young, Joseph Smith’s successor as president of the Church of  Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and prophet to Mitt Romney, had a tremendous number of wives, 55 total.

Joseph Smith instructed Young that plural marriage was a divine  commandment that would bring a select number of righteous men tremendous  blessings for eternity.

The sheer variety of Brigham Young’s marriages makes it difficult to  make sense of them. He married — was sealed to, in Mormon parlance —  young (Clarissa Decker, 15) and old (Hannah Tapfield King, 65). He  married single women and widows. Perhaps most unusually, he was sealed  to his first two mothers-in-law. Perhaps most controversially, he married women who were already married, some to Mormon men in good standing.

Is Mormonism a cult?

by Matt Slick

Yes, Mormonism is a cultMormonism, also called The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS),  is not considered to be Christian by Christians.  In fact, Mormonism teaches the following non Christian, non biblical doctrines.  (Note that all the documentation is taken from Mormon writers and Mormon scriptures.)

  • God used to be a man on another planet, (Mormon Doctrine, p. 321; Joseph Smith, Times and Seasons, vol. 5, p. 613-614; Orson Pratt, Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, p. 345; Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, p. 333).
  • God resides near a star called Kolob, (Pearl of Great Price, p. 34-35; Mormon Doctrine, p. 428).
  • “The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s…” (Doctrines and Covenants 130:22).
  • God is in the form of a man, (Joseph Smith, Journal of Discourses, vol. 6, p. 3).
  • “God  himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits  enthroned in yonder heavens!!! . . . We have imagined that God was God  from all eternity. I will refute that idea and take away the veil, so  that you may see,” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345).
  • After you become a good Mormon, you have the potential of becoming a god, (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345-347, 354.)
  • There is a mother god, (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 443).
  • God is married to his goddess wife and has spirit children, (Mormon Doctrine, p. 516).
  •   The trinity is three separate Gods: The Father, the Son, and the Holy  Ghost. “That these three are separate individuals, physically distinct  from each other, is demonstrated by the accepted records of divine  dealings with man,” (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 35.).

In contrast to these teachings, Christianity the Bible teaches that God has always been God and was never a man (Psalm 90:2).   The Bible no where says he lives near another star or that the Father  has a body of flesh and bones — which Christ contradicted in John 4:24 and Luke 24:39.  We do not have the potential of becoming gods because there are no gods formed (Isaiah 43:10; 44:6,8; 45:5).  The Trinity is one God (Deut. 6:4), not three.

There are numerous books written about Mormonism from a biblical perspective, exposing its false teachings.

Of  course, we do not hate the Mormons and we pray for their repentance  from believing in false gods.  But, Mormonism is not Christian.

The Order of the Illuminati: Its Origins, Its Methods and Its Influence

secretarcana.com/…/the-order-of-the-illuminati-its-origins-its-method…

As the number of people asking that question has grown, facts about the Order … tasks to accomplish in order to prepare them to take action in the “real world”. … A definite alliance between the Illuminati and Freemasonry became possible in …… Illuminati process reminds me a lot of Mormonism/LDS church style which no .

Statement by the Southern Baptist Church on the Mormon church

By Adam Miller / Baptist Press

Friday, February 26, 2010

As one Mormon candidate launches his White House bid, the Southern Baptist official … points out, the Latter-day Saints … is that Mormons do not know the real Jesus of the Bible.

Southern Baptist Convention warns Christians about  teachings of Mormonism

Apapepress

February 15, 2007

By Allie Martin

Rob Bowman with the North American  Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) says Christians need to  be aware that the beliefs of the Mormon Church are inconsistent with biblical  Christianity. As one Mormon candidate launches his White House bid, the Southern  Baptist official is urging Christians to take advantage of materials his  denomination offers that teach the truth about Mormonism.

As former  Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney officially announced his presidential  candidacy this week, a cover story in USA Today looked at the beliefs of the  Mormon Church, formally known as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day  Saints.

Rob Bowman,  manager of the apologetics and interfaith evangelism department of the SBC’s  North American Mission Board (NAMB), thinks Christians would be wise to take an  even closer look at the Mormons, lest any be deceived about the nature and  tenets of that religious group. He says although the Mormon Church wages an  expensive public relations campaign, using terms familiar to appeal to  evangelicals, the core teachings of the church do not line up with scripture and  are inconsistent with evangelical Christianity.

For this  reason, Bowman says the SBC has for decades offered, through its various  entities, information resources focusing on the Mormon Church. Many of these  resources detail the differences between Christian and Mormon beliefs — of which  there are many, the NAMB official observes.

For example,  Bowman notes, “In 15 short years, [Mormon Church founder] Joseph Smith went from  being a thoroughgoing monotheist, a believer in one god, to a thoroughgoing  polytheist, teaching the existence of many gods.” Also, he points out, the  Latter-day Saints teach that humans can achieve godhood by joining the church  and taking part in specific deeds and ceremonies.

Such  divergent beliefs are among the reasons, the NAMB official asserts, why  Christians must know the Bible, so as not to be fooled by non-biblical Mormon  teachings. As for the Mormon Church members themselves, he adds, “Our concern is  that they don’t really know the God of the Bible. So we’re concerned for their  salvation.”

The concern  of Bible-believing Christians is that Mormons do not know the real Jesus of  scripture, Bowman explains. The SBC’s desire, he says, is not only to see  evangelicals learn about the differences between Mormonism and Christianity but  also to see Mormons come to know Jesus and have an authentic relationship with  Him.

Evangelical  Theologian: Bottom Line is Mormons are not Christians

Michelle Vu

Christian Post  Reporter

July 27 2007

Mormons  believe in a false gospel and are not Christians, concluded one of the nation’s  preeminent evangelicals in what appeared to be the close of an online debate  over Mormonism.

“Here  is the bottom line. As an Evangelical Christian – a Christian who holds to the  ‘traditional Christian orthodoxy’ of the Church – I do not believe that  Mormonism leads to salvation,” wrote Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr., president of  Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, on Wednesday evening.

“To the  contrary, I believe that it is a false gospel that, however sincere and kind its  adherents may be, leads to eternal death rather than to eternal life,” he  stated.

Mohler’s response is part of an ongoing “blog dialogue” sponsored by the Web  site Beliefnet.com. Since June 28, the evangelical scholar and prominent Mormon  science-fiction writer Orson Scott Card have been debating whether Mormons can  be considered Christians.

During  the course of the debate, Card focused on whether Mormons are moral people, good  citizens and why Mormon presidential candidate Mitt Romney should be supported  by evangelicals. He emphasized that Mormons share many of the same values as  evangelical Christians and believe Jesus Christ is the only path to salvation.

However, Mohler noted that whether a Mormon has similar moral values to  evangelical Christians is beside the point because Beliefnet.com had asked  whether Mormons can be considered Christians based on traditional Christian  orthodoxy.

“It  appears that we are not really discussing the same question,” noted Mohler in  his latest blog response.

“The  debate has never been about whether Mormons are good Americans or would make  good neighbors,” he wrote.

“I dare  say that most American Evangelicals and traditional Roman Catholics would find  more in common with Mormons in terms of child-rearing, sexual morality, the  protection of marriage and family, and a host of other issues, than they would  with liberal Catholics or liberal Protestants,” acknowledged Mohler.

But  Mormonism from its beginning has rejected traditional Christian orthodoxy, which  is part of the core Mormon identity, pointed out the highly-respected  theologian. The subtitle of The Book of Mormon is “Another Testament of Jesus  Christ.”

“A  ‘testament,’ that is, other than that accepted by the historic Christian  churches,” Mohler highlighted.

Mohler  – who is often seen on “Larry King Live” and other popular news show  representing the Christian voice – concluded that Mormonism is not just another  form of Christianity and is incompatible with “traditional Christian orthodoxy.”

Mormon  defender Card readily agrees with Mohler that Mormons do not fit into the  Christian category as defined by traditional Christian orthodoxy. However, he  argues that Mormons should be considered “nontraditional Christians.”

“Despite our deep differences of belief over the nature of God and his plans for  his children, we recognize that those who believe in the other Christian faiths  have taken a giant step closer to fulfilling the intentions of our Lord,” wrote  Card on Thursday. “They are, in heart and mind, Christians.”

He  further added, “We ask only the same favor in return. Let’s take that word  ‘traditional’ and make use of it. Instead of saying that we are ‘not  Christian’…let us agree that Mormons are ‘nontraditional Christians.’”

Card  looked back on Christian history when Protestant Christian denominations were  not accepted as part of the traditional church according to the Catholic  viewpoint, and was even condemned guilty of heresy.

He  concluded: “Call us ‘nontraditional Christians’ and continue to encourage your  communicants not to believe our doctrines. We’ll happily continue to call you  ‘traditional Christians’ and teach people why they should believe our  doctrines.”The Mormon defender ended by calling for unity in a world where Christians are  persecuted and expressed appreciation that Dr. Mohler affirmed that Mormons  should be equally considered for American public offices regardless of  theological difference.

Basic beliefs of Mormons  explained

By Mike Licona
NAMB,  Director, Apologetics and Interfaith Evangelism
Updated Monday, April 07, 2008

Mormonism started in 1830 with 24-year-old  year old Joseph Smith Jr. According to Smith, he had several experiences, during  which God, Jesus, and the angel Moroni gave him instructions. Part of the  instructions was to dig up some gold plates buried by the angel Moroni around  A.D. 400 on a hill just outside of Smith’s town of Palmyra, New York. Smith dug  up the plates, claimed they were written in “Reformed Egyptian,” and that God  had given him the ability to translate them. This translation became known as  the Book of Mormon, an account of the ancient inhabitants of North America  between 600 B.C. and A.D. 400.

Mormons have four sources of authority: the  Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Pearl of Great Price, and Doctrine and Covenants.  The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has become one of the  fastest-growing religions in the world. The church owns Brigham Young  University.

Mormon beliefs are fundamentally different  from biblical Christianity.

1. God. Once a human as we are now, and  progressed to become God. He is one of many gods.

2. Man. Has the ability to progress and  become a god just as Jehovah did.

3. Marriage. Polygamy is no longer advocated,  although it once was encouraged.

4. Jesus. The son of God, but not part of the  Godhead. Mormons do not believe in the Trinity.

Mormons are very sincere about their faith.  Conversations with Mormon missionaries promise to be cordial. Mormon scholars,  such as those at Brigham Young University, are well aware of the challenges  which face Mormonism.

What do Mormons tell you when they visit?

When Mormons visit you, they usually will not  focus on the doctrines previously mentioned. In fact, they probably will not  even bring them up during the first few meetings. Instead they will seek to find  common ground with you on many of the doctrines Christians believe. For example,  they may begin by saying that God revealed the Old Testament through Moses and  the prophets. Then Jesus came, was crucified and resurrected. His disciples  wrote books and letters that became the New Testament. We all agree on these  facts.

Then the differences begin. They will tell  you that before Jesus’ ascension into heaven, He appeared to the inhabitants of  North America and gave them the gospel as well. His message and the history of  these inhabitants from 600 B.C. to A.D. 400 are recorded in the Book of Mormon.

Furthermore, they will tell you that since  the apostles were not replaced when they were killed, the Church went into  apostasy. In other words, it abandoned the true faith, and consequently, a  restoration was necessary. Mormons believe that God chose Joseph Smith to bring  that restoration; therefore, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is  the true Church.

How to answer Mormons

Mormons are well equipped to answer many of  the issues Christians bring to their attention and have answers adequate to  silence the average critic. The Mormon missionaries who come to your door are  cordial and will listen to what you have to say. Enjoy the opportunity to share  your faith with them, but be prepared by having good answers. Although there are  many issues, which you may bring to the Mormons’ attention, focus on four that  are of primary importance:

A. The Bible is reliable. Mormons claim that  the Bible has been corrupted over the years as evidenced by the many different  translations. How do we know that the Bible we have today is the same as it was  2,000 years ago? The original words of the Bible have been preserved with  remarkable purity and that its accuracy has been confirmed by both history and  archaeology. Variances among English translations do not call into question the  preservation of the Bible over the years. Until you have shown this to a Mormon,  it is useless to point out that some Mormon doctrines differ from the Bible.  They will only respond that the Bible is unreliable.

B. There is no archaeological confirmation of  the Book of Mormon. While the spade of the archaeologist has confirmed many  places and peoples mentioned in the Bible, it has not been at all favorable to  the Book of Mormon. Although Mormons will confidently assert that archaeology  has confirmed the Book of Mormon’s accuracy time and time again, professional  archaeologists have arrived at quite a different conclusion.

C. The Book of Abraham is a fraud. The Book  of Abraham is one of the books in the Pearl of Great Price, one of Mormonism’s  scriptures. Joseph Smith purchased some ancient Egyptian papyri and claimed it  was an original book penned by Abraham himself while in Egypt. He translated it  allegedly by the same gift, which God had given him to translate the Book of  Mormon. Professional Egyptologists have translated the papyri since their  rediscovery in 1967. Their translations bear no resemblance to Smith’s  translation, exposing him as a charlatan.

D. Evidence for Mormonism? Mormons are  convinced that Mormonism is true because the inward testimony of God tells them  so. If you are going to be effective when talking to Mormons, it is crucial that  you address this issue. Otherwise, no amount of solid evidence, which testifies  against Mormonism, will be of help to them.

(EDITOR’S NOTE – The North  American Mission Board’s apologetics web site, http://www.4truth.net, carries much more  information about many brands of religion.

Romney’s LDS  faith makes him a ‘cult’ member, Texas pastor says

By Peggy Fletcher Stack
The Salt Lake Tribune

09/26/2008

   WASHINGTON –  Evangelicals who believe the country needs a Christian in the White House but  promoted Mitt Romney’s candidacy during the Republican primaries were  hypocrites, according to a Texas pastor.

    Romney, a Mormon, is  not a Christian, the Rev. Robert Jeffress said, but a member of a “cult.”

    “I believe we should  always support a Christian over a non-Christian,” Jeffress, pastor of First  Baptist Church of Dallas, told a packed audience of journalists at last  weekend’s Religion Newswriters Association (RNA) annual meeting. “The value of  electing a Christian goes beyond public policies. . . . Christians are uniquely  favored by God, [while] Mormons, Hindus and Muslims worship a false god. The  eternal consequences outweigh political ones. It is worse to legitimize a faith  that would lead people to a separation from God.”

    Jeffress made his  remarks during a luncheon debate with Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for the  American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), a law firm and educational  organization that focuses on religious-liberty issues. The DeMoss Group, a  Christian public-relations firm in Duluth, Ga., sponsored the event.

    Sekulow, who also  disagrees with Mormon theology but supported Romney’s candidacy, argued he would  rather have a president who promoted a conservative political agenda than one  who shared his doctrinal positions. 

“Jimmy Carter ran as a  born-again Christian,” Sekulow reasoned, “but his presidency did nothing for the  issues I care about.”

    Mark DeMoss, the  company’s president, opened the session by describing his decision to lead  Romney’s outreach to conservative Christians. DeMoss said he had come to admire  Romney, despite their theological differences, but was amazed at the vehement  opposition to the Mormon’s candidacy among Evangelicals.

    “When making the  choice of candidate for president, I don’t care how different the person’s  theology is from mine, just like I don’t care about my doctor’s theology or the  guy’s who built my house or the architect’s,” DeMoss said in an interview this  week. “I’m challenging people who would oppose a Mormon because he’s a Mormon,  but I’m also challenging people who would instantly embrace a Southern Baptist  because he’s a Southern Baptist. Both conclusions are bad.”

    DeMoss said he  doesn’t mind when people come to different conclusions about which candidate to  support, but hopes as least “they’re thinking.”

    The lively debate  seemed to prove his point.

    “It was one of the  more spirited lunch discussions we’ve ever had at RNA,” said RNA president Kevin  Eckstrom, who noted that the journalist organization did not organize the event.  “A lot of people were uncomfortable with what Dr. Jeffress said about Mormons,  but what we were hoping for was something provocative that would get people  talking, and certainly this did it.”

    Many reporters said  they had never heard the word “cult,” which Jeffress repeatedly called the LDS  Church, used so “freely and recklessly,” said Eckstrom, editor of Religion News  Service in Washington, D.C. But Jeffress used the same word to describe  “Catholics, Hindus, Buddhists and virtually everyone else.”

    It was useful for  reporters to be aware of such strident views, Eckstrom said, because they are  “completely mainstream in a lot of evangelical quarters.”

    First Baptist of  Dallas “is not a backwater pulpit somewhere. It is a major church in Texas and  in Southern Baptist circles,” Eckstrom said. “It’s a huge institution and a lot  of followers. He’s not just spouting these opinions for himself but proud of the  fact that he was going back to his congregation and declare every other religion  was wrong, and at least 10,000 people hear this position every week.”

    The Church of Jesus  Christ of Latter-day Saints insists that it is a Christian faith, though not a  traditional brand of Christianity. LDS officials today declined to comment on  Jeffress’ statements until they see a transcript of the remarks, spokeswoman Kim  Farah said. 

Apologetics

The leader of this hate mongering, white-supremacist, racist cult is Arnold Murray. He teaches the common Mormon (LDS) doctrine that men preexisted time.

GOP Hopeful Mike Huckabee  – Mormons Believe Jesus, Devil Are Brothers … the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints said Huckabee … was a cult. “I’m …

www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,316507,00.html

Mike Huckabee Makes Amends on Mormonism: The evangelical, who previously trafficked in anti-Mormon tropes, validated Romney’s religion in his RNC speech

My ancestors came west with the Mormon wagon train. I was born andf lived in Utah. If you believe in the Bible, the Mormon religion is a false religion

Black Mormons Face Tough Election Choice Between Romney And

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…/blackmormons-election-romn…

Jahnabi Barooahby Jahnabi Barooahin 286 Google+ circlesMore by Jahnabi Barooah

Jun 12, 2012 – “I’ve been black my whole life and a Mormon for 30 years and never thought Until 1978, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints barred  blacks from its all-male priesthood. After that landmark shift 34 years  ago, missionaries found some success winning black converts, but  African-Americans still represent only about 3 percent of the Mormons’ 6  million U.S. members. The Black race is curse and should slaves

This letter ought to shock anyone into recognizing the racism of the LDS church. Letter to Gov. George Romney from Bishop Delbert Stapley
http://www2.ldsfreedom.org/sites/default/files/delbert_stapley.pdf

What the Book of Mormon say about Race

  1. 1 Nephi 11:13 (Mary) “. . . she was exceedingly fair and white.”
  2. 1 Nephi 12:23 (Prophecy of Lamanites after Christ) “. . . became a  dark, and loathsome, and a filthy people, full of idleness and all  manner of abominations.”
  3. 1 Nephi 13:15 (Gentiles) “. . . they were white, and exceedingly  fair and beautiful, like unto my people [Nephites] before they were  slain.”
  4. 2 Nephi 5:21 “. . . a sore  cursing . . . as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome,  that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a  skin of blackness to come upon them.”
  5. 2 Nephi 30:6 (Prophecy to Lamanites) “. . . scales of darkness shall  begin to fall . . . they shall be a white and delightsome people.”  (Changed to pure and delightsome in 1981)
  6. Jacob 3:5 (Lamanites cursed) “. . .whom ye hate because of their  filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins. . .”
  7. Jacob 3:8-9 “. . .their skins will be whiter than yours . . . revile  no more against them because of the darkness of their skins . . .”
  8. Alma 3:6 “. . . skins of the Lamanites were dark, according to the  mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them  because of their transgression and their rebellion. . .”
  9. Alma 3:8 (Cursed) “. . .that their seed might be distinguished from  the seed of their brethren . . .that they might not mix . . .”
  10. Alma 3:9 “. . . whosoever did mingle his seed with that of the Lamanites did bring the same curse upon his seed.”
  11. Alma 3:14 (Lamanites cursed) “. . . set a mark on them that they and their seed may be separated from thee and thy seed. . .”
  12. Alma 3:19 (Amlicites cursed) “. . . brought upon themselves the curse …”
  13. Alma 23:18 “. . . [Lamanites] did open a correspondence with them [Nephites] and the curse of God did no more follow them.”
  14. 3 Nephi 2:14-16 “. . . Lamanites who had united with the Nephites  were numbered among the Nephites; And their curse was taken from them,  and their skin became white like unto the Nephites . . . became  exceedingly fair . . .”
  15. 3 Nephi 19:25, 30 (Disciples) “. . . they were as white as the  countenance and also the garments of Jesus; and behold the whiteness  thereof did exceed all the whiteness . . . nothing upon earth so white  as the whiteness thereof . . . they were white, even as Jesus.”
  16. Mormon 5:15 (Prophecy about Lamanites) “. . .shall become a dark, a  filthy, and a loathsome people, beyond the description of that which  ever hath been amongst us . . .”
  17. Mormon 5:17 “They were once a delightsome people . . .”

Mitt Romney, being a priest and a high ranking bishop must believe that these racist scriptures in the Book of Mormon are true.  In order to be a bishop or a Mormon you must believe in the Book of Mormon. It stands to reason that Mitt Romney is Racist or else he would renounce Joseph Smith teachings and the Book of Mormon.

White Blood Mixed with Negro Blood Brings Death on the Spot