Martin Luther King was murdered 50 years ago today by the U.S. National Security State as it murdered President Kennedy in 1963 and Robert Kennedy a month later. Any sane and rational person can look over the evidence for themselves. All three of these people were direct threats to the power of the National Security State (formed in 1947 by the National Security Act, which President Truman signed and later regretted signing that WWII spawned and the Cold War nurtured.
Since all major security agencies act in secret without close supervision of either Congress or the President/Executive Branch it is obvious that these agencies and their contractors (where the action is these days) would go their own way and focus on gaining and maintaining power. This is what people do when in power. The only counter-argument is that these people may be acting out of patriotism and be an elite protecting us from threats we are too dim to comprehend and thus they must act in secret to eliminate those threats. I don't doubt that people in the security apparatus tell themselves they are acting in the interests of the American people--but they are acing in our interest without our permission.
So, how do I know Dr. King was killed by the U.S. government? Because I know that is what the security services do to any perceived "enemy", whether foreign or domestic, to the power of the State first they use persuasion, then threats, then death. William Pepper has written and spoken extensively on the matter and I'll let you look into that I don't have the time or the interest in educating you, dear reader, in what you ought to be researching on your own you can start with this video. Instead of proving anything about King I will say two things. First, the Knig family is convinced King was not killed by James Earl Rae but by the U.S. government. Second, there is a smoking gun in the case for U.S. government involvement with domestic assassinations of political figures. So I will move onto the RFK assassination because the smoking guns here are so obvious and quick to tell.
The bullets that killed Senator Robert Kennedy were delivered at near point blank range to the back of the head from behind whereas Sirhan Sirhan the man convicted of the murder fired his shots from the front at no closer than two and a half feet according to witnesses. Case closed. Now, in addition, sound analysis of the shots fired that evening indicate, clearly, that thirteen shots were fired out of an eight shot revolver--again , case closed. Yet they convicted Sirhan which meant LAPD, the District Attorney, the Judge, the Defense Attorney were all in on the plot. Sounds paranoid but that's how it worked--the evidence is obvious. So if they could do that, as they clearly did, they could also kill King since he was as big a threat to these people as JFK and RFK were.
King was threatening to bring together marginal people, minorities, anti-war activists, labor at all levels into a coherent and much more radical movement that the FBI and others had been working through Cointelpro and other processes that the government had been working for quite some time. King threatened to bring all these disparate elements. He had to go.
My point here is not who killed any of these men who stood up for our country and its best traditions against the new government installed during the coup of 1963 that, essentially, rules us now. We need to realize that we have deliberately allowed ourselves to be put to sleep. It's true that we have been lied to but we have been lied to because we wanted to hear lies--we are mainly interested in convenient myths. The choice is yours.
Just as, sorry to say, sadists tend to be attracted to police and prison guard duty (not to say that most police officer or prison guards are sadists, only those careers offer them great scope in working out their fantasies of power just as priest, scout leaders, teachers and others working with children mainly have no sexual interest in children but they are occupations that attract that sort
The big turning point in our history came with the election of President Kennedy in 1960 and President Eisenhower's famous and almost astonishing Farewell Address in 1961. In that address Ike warned the country about the "military-industrial complex" (a term Eisenhower coined) that had been eating away at the President's power--Eisenhower knew a crisis was unfolding because this complex which included the covert agencies like the CIA had become too powerful to control. Kennedy inherited the crisis and tried to indulge the powers-that-be in that system as best he could. JFK was determined to wrest power back into the hands of the President and he partially succeeded. He refused to invade Cuba and he refused, as he was advised by his Joint Chiefs, to carry out a first-strike against the Soviet Union (estimated 150 million dead) for which the military never forgave. The military at that time believed that wiping out the people of the Soviet Union was a "victory" because in the USA "only" forty million people would probably die and that was an acceptable cost for "victory" over a rival power. The story of the Cuban Missile Crisis is an amazing story that speaks volumes about everyone involved and I urge you to look into it--most of the information is freely available. But the upshot is that President Kennedy and Premier Khrushchev began to agree on many matter including ending the Cold War. Kennedy was soon shot and Khrushchev was soon out of power.
The 1963 assassination of JFK was a full-scale coup d'état that continued until Nixon left office, the last remaining President with power. Other
Since all major security agencies act in secret without close supervision of either Congress or the President/Executive Branch it is obvious that these agencies and their contractors (where the action is these days) would go their own way and focus on gaining and maintaining power. This is what people do when in power. The only counter-argument is that these people may be acting out of patriotism and be an elite protecting us from threats we are too dim to comprehend and thus they must act in secret to eliminate those threats. I don't doubt that people in the security apparatus tell themselves they are acting in the interests of the American people--but they are acing in our interest without our permission.
So, how do I know Dr. King was killed by the U.S. government? Because I know that is what the security services do to any perceived "enemy", whether foreign or domestic, to the power of the State first they use persuasion, then threats, then death. William Pepper has written and spoken extensively on the matter and I'll let you look into that I don't have the time or the interest in educating you, dear reader, in what you ought to be researching on your own you can start with this video. Instead of proving anything about King I will say two things. First, the Knig family is convinced King was not killed by James Earl Rae but by the U.S. government. Second, there is a smoking gun in the case for U.S. government involvement with domestic assassinations of political figures. So I will move onto the RFK assassination because the smoking guns here are so obvious and quick to tell.
The bullets that killed Senator Robert Kennedy were delivered at near point blank range to the back of the head from behind whereas Sirhan Sirhan the man convicted of the murder fired his shots from the front at no closer than two and a half feet according to witnesses. Case closed. Now, in addition, sound analysis of the shots fired that evening indicate, clearly, that thirteen shots were fired out of an eight shot revolver--again , case closed. Yet they convicted Sirhan which meant LAPD, the District Attorney, the Judge, the Defense Attorney were all in on the plot. Sounds paranoid but that's how it worked--the evidence is obvious. So if they could do that, as they clearly did, they could also kill King since he was as big a threat to these people as JFK and RFK were.
King was threatening to bring together marginal people, minorities, anti-war activists, labor at all levels into a coherent and much more radical movement that the FBI and others had been working through Cointelpro and other processes that the government had been working for quite some time. King threatened to bring all these disparate elements. He had to go.
My point here is not who killed any of these men who stood up for our country and its best traditions against the new government installed during the coup of 1963 that, essentially, rules us now. We need to realize that we have deliberately allowed ourselves to be put to sleep. It's true that we have been lied to but we have been lied to because we wanted to hear lies--we are mainly interested in convenient myths. The choice is yours.
Just as, sorry to say, sadists tend to be attracted to police and prison guard duty (not to say that most police officer or prison guards are sadists, only those careers offer them great scope in working out their fantasies of power just as priest, scout leaders, teachers and others working with children mainly have no sexual interest in children but they are occupations that attract that sort
The big turning point in our history came with the election of President Kennedy in 1960 and President Eisenhower's famous and almost astonishing Farewell Address in 1961. In that address Ike warned the country about the "military-industrial complex" (a term Eisenhower coined) that had been eating away at the President's power--Eisenhower knew a crisis was unfolding because this complex which included the covert agencies like the CIA had become too powerful to control. Kennedy inherited the crisis and tried to indulge the powers-that-be in that system as best he could. JFK was determined to wrest power back into the hands of the President and he partially succeeded. He refused to invade Cuba and he refused, as he was advised by his Joint Chiefs, to carry out a first-strike against the Soviet Union (estimated 150 million dead) for which the military never forgave. The military at that time believed that wiping out the people of the Soviet Union was a "victory" because in the USA "only" forty million people would probably die and that was an acceptable cost for "victory" over a rival power. The story of the Cuban Missile Crisis is an amazing story that speaks volumes about everyone involved and I urge you to look into it--most of the information is freely available. But the upshot is that President Kennedy and Premier Khrushchev began to agree on many matter including ending the Cold War. Kennedy was soon shot and Khrushchev was soon out of power.
The 1963 assassination of JFK was a full-scale coup d'état that continued until Nixon left office, the last remaining President with power. Other
No comments:
Post a Comment