See other Dead Constitution Articles
Title: FBI tracked King's every move
Source:
http://www.cnn.com/
URL Source: http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/03/31/mlk.fbi.conspiracy/index.html
Published: Apr 4, 2008
Author: Jen Christensen
Post Date: 2008-04-04 13:45:16 by robin
Keywords: None
Views: 553
Comments: 40
(CNN) -- FBI wiretaps have "given us the most powerful and persuasive source of all for seeing how utterly selfless Martin Luther King was," as a civil rights leader, according to a leading civil rights scholar. "You see him being intensely self-critical. King really and truly believed that he was there to be of service to others. This was not a man with any egomaniacal joy of being a famous person, or being a leader," said Pulitzer Prize-winning scholar David Garrow in a recent interview with CNN. Hoping to prove the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. was under the influence of Communists, the FBI kept the civil rights leader under constant surveillance. The agency's hidden tape recorders turned up almost nothing about communism. But they did reveal embarrassing details about King's sex life -- details the FBI was able to use against him. The almost fanatical zeal with which the FBI pursued King is disclosed in tens of thousands of FBI memos from the 1960s. The FBI paper trail spells out in detail the government agency's concerted efforts to derail King's efforts on behalf of the civil rights movement. The FBI's interest in King intensified after the March on Washington in August 1963, when King delivered his "I have a dream speech," which many historians consider the most important speech of the 20th century. After the speech, an FBI memo called King the "most dangerous and effective Negro leader in the country." The FBI began secretly tracking King's flights and watching his associates. In July 1963, a month before the March on Washington, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover filed a request with Attorney General Robert Kennedy to tap King's and his associates' phones and to bug their homes and offices. In September, Kennedy consented to the technical surveillance. Kennedy gave the FBI permission to break into King's office and home to install the bugs, as long as agents recognized the "delicacy of this particular matter" and didn't get caught installing them. Kennedy added a proviso -- he wanted to be personally informed of any pertinent information. While King did have associates who had been members of the Communist Party, by all accounts they severed those ties when they started working in the civil rights movement. What's more, the FBI bugs never picked up evidence that King himself was a Communist, or was interested in toeing the party line. But the long list of bugs in his hotel rooms picked up just enough about King's love life. A decision in a 1977 court case brought by Bernard Lee, one of King's associates, sealed the transcripts from those wiretaps until 2027. But King's associates confirm there were at least two cases in which FBI surveillance caught King in compromising circumstances. The first incident involved King at a party at the Willard Hotel in Washington. The FBI recorded the party and captured the sounds of a sexual encounter in the room afterwards. The second incident occurred during King's stay in a hotel in Los Angeles, California. There, agents heard another drunken gathering in which King told an off-color joke about the recently assassinated President John F. Kennedy. Hoover sent transcripts and excerpts of those recordings to the White House and to the attorney general. Hoover's contempt for King's private behavior is clear in the memos he kept in his personal files. His scrawl across the bottom of positive news stories about King's success dripped with loathing. On a story about King receiving the St. Francis peace medal from the Catholic Church, he wrote "this is disgusting." On the story "King, Pope to Talk on Race," he scribbled "astounding." On a story about King's meeting with the pope, "I am amazed that the Pope gave an audience to such a degenerate." On a story about King being the heavy favorite to win the Nobel Prize, he wrote "King could well qualify for the 'top alley cat' prize!" When King learned he would be the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964, the FBI decided to take its harassment of King one step further, sending him an insulting and threatening note anonymously. A draft was found in the FBI files years later. In it the FBI wrote, "You are a colossal fraud and an evil, vicious one at that." The letter went on to say, "The American public ... will know you for what you are -- an evil, abnormal beast," and "Satan could not do more." The letter's threat was ominous, if not specific: "King you are done." Some have theorized the intent of the letter was to drive King to commit suicide in order to avoid personal embarrassment. "King, there is only one thing left for you to do," the letter concluded. "You know what it is ... You better take it before your filthy, abnormal fraudulent self is bared to the nation." With the exception of the wiretap transcripts that remain sealed under court order, many of the other memos were made public as part of high-profile congressional investigations into the FBI's harassment of King. A summary was put together during the course of these investigations. Other memos were released through a Freedom of Information Act request from the Center for National Security Studies in 1978. Another large batch was released through a 1979 FOIA request from David Garrow. While the memos depict a cold and calculating attempt by the government to personally embarrass King, the memos also create an ironic byproduct, according to Garrow. "When you have a wiretap on someone you pick up all sorts of dreck. But in terms of the political history that ironically the FBI has created for us, it's a wonderful resource," Garrow said. FBI tracked King's every move
CNN
Watch how the FBI tracked King's every move »
The bureau convened a meeting of department heads to "explore how best to carry on our investigation [of King] to produce the desired results without embarrassment to the Bureau," which included "a complete analysis of the avenues of approach aimed at neutralizing King as an effective Negro leader."
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 35.
#1. To: robin (#0)
Nice try, Jen.
Now we have posters here calling Obama "overtly communist". J. Edgar Hoover has his spiritual descendants.
Ari, when you get a minute, perhaps you can make a case to vote for Obama, and use his voting record to help. If I've missed a post of yours that did so, just point me to it. I've not seen anything written by you that persuades.
If anybody bears a burden of proof, I think it's somebody who calls a major contender for the presidency "overtly communist". Can't say I've seen that burden met, or even attempted to be met.
Can't say I've seen that burden met, or even attempted to be met. You know Ari, I've posted enough for you to know exactly what I mean. You rarely offer anything of your own. I'd say this is your opportunity to start bringing a case FOR Obama. I have nothing to defend. I've explained my positions in my own words, provided ample material to make and support my position. It is only my opinion, take it or leave it. Now, it's your turn. We're not changing minds here... remember that. If you just want to pick away at me, then apparently you worry that I'm making sense to someone??? I have no one to vote for, so why should you concern yourself with my opinion of Obama? If he is worthy, then make a case.
You throw the burden of proof on me, after you accuse Obama of being "overtly communist". That's rich.
Commie ping
Have you two met yet? You should hang out together. Commie ping I voted for Libertarian Harry Browne in ''96, for Buchanan in 2000. The only candidate I've donated to so far this campaign is Ron Paul. I've posted most of the threads here about Bob Barr's prospective run for the presidency. If I'm a Communist in your mind, there aren't many people who aren't Communists.
you were obviously anti-establishment. how in the heck did you make the leap from that ideology to now enthusiastically supporting a democrat?
How have all these people here made their leap towards supporting confrontation (if not war) with Iran and the whole Bush/Cheney/McCain neocon foreign policy? That, in case you haven't noticed, is what I am most opposed to.
all these people? name names please. That, in case you haven't noticed, is what I am most opposed to i have noticed. as am i and as are most (if not all) the people who are debating with you about obama. we're in agreement on that. NONE of us wants more war. where we differ is that you believe that with democrat obama, we won't get more war. we believe we will as he, like the rest of the establishment politicians, is merely a puppet of those who are engineering the wars and globalism.
Bingo, and nicely put. The only reason I'm rooting for Obama at all is because I deeply DESPISE Hillary NAFTA GATT IRAQ Clinton. She's a bald-faced liar, a corporate whore, and really I cannot even think of her too much without wanting to puke my guts out. At least I can actually think of Obama and not feel like someone kicked me in the gut. But do I have any high hopes or expectations for Obama should he win? Oh please. At best, at the VERY best, he may help average people just a little tiny bit, sort of like a careful executioner who is slowly drowning a torture victim who carefully, precisely allows the victim to get the occasional desperate gasp of air so that he can prolong their suffering as long as possible. With Obama, we may be allowed to get a few desperate gasps of air before being forced under the water yet again by our Trilateralist / CFR / Masonic / internationalist bankers / corporate masters.
since we're going to get one of the three, my preference would also be obama if only for his ability to orate. but i'll not ever vote for him or any of the selected candidates because that would simply be an endorsement of the fraud.
But in the meantime you permit (I would say foster) an atmosphere where persons who say anything favorable about Obama are subjected to vicious personal attacks. (I am not the only one who feels increasingly uncomfortable here because of that atmosphere.)
ari, permit. yes. foster? that's not fair. i have a hands off approach to moderating. i let people post their own comments and fight it out (if you will) with each other. i seldom get involved in disagreements among individuals here and try very hard not to take sides. my opinions are my own and i assure you that there is no concerted effort on my part to foster an atmosphere of discord. personally, i'm uncomfortable with it. i liked it better when we, for the most part, were unified. in my opinion, this all began with Ron Paul's departure.
#36. To: christine, _______ (#35)
You complained to me when you disagreed with me. Have you ever complained to, e.g., _____, when he made a far more offensive post than I ever have?
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestHidden wiretaps turned up no Communist Party ties
#2. To: Tauzero, Peppa (#1)
#4. To: aristeides (#2)
Now we have posters here calling Obama "overtly communist".
#6. To: Peppa (#4)
#7. To: aristeides (#6)
If anybody bears a burden of proof, I think it's somebody who calls a major contender for the presidency "overtly communist".
#10. To: Peppa (#7)
I'd say this is your opportunity to start bringing a case FOR Obama.
#11. To: aristeides, DrStrange (#10)
Have you two met yet? You should hang out together.
#15. To: _______ (#11)
#26. To: aristeides (#15)
I voted for Libertarian Harry Browne in ''96, for Buchanan in 2000. The only candidate I've donated to so far this campaign is Ron Paul.
#27. To: christine (#26)
#30. To: aristeides (#27)
How have all these people here made their leap towards supporting confrontation (if not war) with Iran and the whole Bush/Cheney/McCain neocon foreign policy?
#31. To: christine (#30)
NONE of us wants more war. where we differ is that you believe that with democrat obama, we won't get more war. we believe we will as he, like the rest of the establishment politicians, is merely a puppet of those who are engineering the wars and globalism.
#32. To: Elliott Jackalope (#31)
#34. To: christine (#32)
since we're going to get one of the three, my preference would also be obama if only for his ability to orate.
#35. To: aristeides (#34)
But in the meantime you permit (I would say foster)
Replies to Comment # 35.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 35.